{
 "record_id": "CW-2016-0026",
 "status": "current",
 "merged_id": "CWC-0962",
 "alias_merged_ids": [],
 "display_title": "Civil Police Constable v. State of U.P. and Others",
 "display_title_redacted": "Civil Police Constable v. State of U.P. and Others",
 "state": "Uttar Pradesh",
 "district": "Mathura",
 "district_at_time": null,
 "city_town": null,
 "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Refinery, District Mathura",
 "court": "Allahabad High Court",
 "court_as_verified": "Allahabad High Court",
 "bench": null,
 "case_title": "Civil Police Constable v. State of U.P. and Others",
 "case_number": "Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15815 of 2014",
 "citation": null,
 "judges": [
  "Tarun Agarwala",
  "Prabhat Chandra Tripathi"
 ],
 "judgment_date": "2016-04-28",
 "date_precision": "day",
 "judgment_year": 2016,
 "incident_date": "1998-12-30",
 "incident_year": 1998,
 "category": "Other",
 "admin_category": "misconduct",
 "admin_subcategory": "other",
 "subcategory": "other",
 "subcategory_display": "other",
 "protest_override_heuristic": false,
 "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld",
 "sections": [
  "U.P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 Rule 4(1)(a)(i)"
 ],
 "officers": [
  {
   "name": null,
   "rank": "Constable",
   "unit": "Civil Police, U.P. Police, Police Station Refinery, Mathura",
   "role": "held_liable",
   "publish_grade": "unnamed",
   "gate_reasons": [
    "ledger:no_row",
    "key2:no_row"
   ],
   "ledger_role": null,
   "key2": null,
   "key2_agy": null,
   "key2_claude": null,
   "key2_union": null,
   "key2_gemapi": null,
   "key2_openrouter": null,
   "key2_gpt56": null,
   "grok": null,
   "jev_risk": null,
   "jev_p_culpable": null,
   "key2_gpt": null,
   "later_outcome": null,
   "name_public": null,
   "display": "Constable, Civil Police, U.P. Police, Police Station Refinery, Mathura"
  }
 ],
 "officer_count": 1,
 "victims": [],
 "victims_redacted": null,
 "anonymised": false,
 "victim_count": 0,
 "sentence_type": "dismissal",
 "sentence_max_years": null,
 "compensation_inr": null,
 "force": "state_police",
 "primary_source_url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/356535/pandhari-saroj-vs-state-of-up-and-others/",
 "secondary_sources": [],
 "summary": "The Allahabad High Court (Division Bench, 28 April 2016) dismissed the writ petition of dismissed Civil Police Constable of Police Station Refinery, Mathura, and sustained his dismissal dated 28 February 2000 for unauthorised absence from 30 December 1998 to 31 March 1999 while assigned summons-service duty. The Court found his winter-illness alibi and belated medical certificate unconvincing, noting a record of 13 absences totalling 578 days, 15 minor penalties, three censures and adverse entries. The Court held his callous and defiant conduct rendered him unsuitable for a disciplined force and that dismissal would set an example. The approval (15 March 2001), revision rejection (30 April 2002) and Tribunal dismissal of the claim petition (12 December 2013) were left undisturbed, with no compensation ordered. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.",
 "summary_verified": "The Allahabad High Court (Division Bench, 28 April 2016) dismissed the writ petition of dismissed Civil Police Constable of Police Station Refinery, Mathura, and sustained his dismissal dated 28 February 2000 for unauthorised absence from 30 December 1998 to 31 March 1999 while assigned summons-service duty. The Court found his winter-illness alibi and belated medical certificate unconvincing, noting a record of 13 absences totalling 578 days, 15 minor penalties, three censures and adverse entries. The Court held his callous and defiant conduct rendered him unsuitable for a disciplined force and that dismissal would set an example. The approval (15 March 2001), revision rejection (30 April 2002) and Tribunal dismissal of the claim petition (12 December 2013) were left undisturbed, with no compensation ordered.",
 "court_quote": "This callous and defiant approach of the petitioner is totally unsuitable in the police force. Discipline and adherence to the obedience is of paramount importance in a disciplined force like Uttar Pradesh Police.",
 "court_quote_para": "11",
 "confidence": "high",
 "verdict": "accept",
 "verdict_note": "HC dismissed writ; constable's dismissal for repeated unauthorised absence sustained.",
 "verification_status": "V2",
 "verification_badge": "V2 · Externally reported",
 "tier_badge": "Externally reported",
 "tier": "Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded",
 "tier_history": [
  "Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded"
 ],
 "allegations": [
  {
   "category": "Other",
   "primary": true,
   "position": "Material fact supported",
   "position_explainer": "Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.",
   "official_finding_relation": "supports allegation"
  }
 ],
 "institutional_response": [
  {
   "date": "2016-04-28",
   "action_type": "Order issued",
   "status": "Concluded",
   "authority": "Allahabad High Court",
   "independence": "External",
   "legal_effect": "Binding",
   "description": "The Allahabad High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.",
   "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only",
   "source": "Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15815 of 2014",
   "recheck": "Not yet re-checked."
  }
 ],
 "later_proceedings": [],
 "final_outcome_url": null,
 "followup_history": [
  {
   "date": "2026-09-19",
   "scope": "Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass",
   "method": "skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl)",
   "result": "holds",
   "corrections_applied": []
  }
 ],
 "followup_status": "checked",
 "last_checked": "2026-09-19",
 "link_checked_per_url": [
  {
   "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/356535/pandhari-saroj-vs-state-of-up-and-others/",
   "link_checked": null
  }
 ],
 "source_assessment": {
  "established": null,
  "basis": null
 },
 "v3_basis": null,
 "publication_basis": null,
 "reviews": [],
 "retracted": {
  "is_retracted": false
 },
 "fidelity_checked": true,
 "verified_by": [
  "chunk-79"
 ],
 "merged_case_id": "GAP3-6-002",
 "officers_named_public": 0,
 "record_flag": null,
 "service": "police",
 "watch": "babuwatch"
}