{
 "record_id": "CW-2025-0044",
 "status": "current",
 "merged_id": "CWC-0915",
 "alias_merged_ids": [],
 "display_title": "State of Punjab & Ors. v. Punjab Armed Police Constable",
 "display_title_redacted": "State of Punjab & Ors. v. Punjab Armed Police Constable",
 "state": "Punjab",
 "district": "Patiala",
 "district_at_time": null,
 "city_town": "Bahadurgarh",
 "police_station_or_unit": "2nd Commando Battalion, Bahadurgarh",
 "court": "Supreme Court of India",
 "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India",
 "bench": null,
 "case_title": "State of Punjab & Ors. v. Punjab Armed Police Constable",
 "case_number": "Civil Appeal No. 312 of 2012",
 "citation": "2025 INSC 1056; 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 857",
 "judges": [
  "J.K. Maheshwari",
  "Vijay Bishnoi"
 ],
 "judgment_date": "2025-08-29",
 "date_precision": "day",
 "judgment_year": 2025,
 "incident_date": "1994-04-04",
 "incident_year": 1994,
 "category": "Other",
 "admin_category": "misconduct",
 "admin_subcategory": "other",
 "subcategory": "other",
 "subcategory_display": "other",
 "protest_override_heuristic": false,
 "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld",
 "sections": [],
 "officers": [
  {
   "name": null,
   "rank": "Constable",
   "role": "held_liable",
   "unit": "Punjab Armed Police, 2nd Commando Battalion, Bahadurgarh",
   "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, Punjab Armed Police, 2nd Commando Battalion, Bahadurgarh"
  }
 ],
 "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.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/state-of-punjab-v-ex-c-satpal-singhwatermark-1740140.pdf",
 "secondary_sources": [
  "https://s3.courtbook.in/2025/08/STATE-OF-PUNJAB-AND-OTHERS.pdf",
  "https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/past-misconduct-can-add-weight-to-dismissal-even-if-not-mentioned-in-show-cause-notice-supreme-court-302505"
 ],
 "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. Constable (No. 2-C/280) of the Punjab Armed Police, posted with the 2nd Commando Battalion at Bahadurgarh, overstayed one day casual leave from 2 April 1994 and rejoined only on 12 May 1994, having already faced three prior departmental actions for absence. The disciplinary authority dismissed him on 3 May 1996, but two civil courts decreed his challenge suit and the Punjab and Haryana High Court sustained that relief in second appeal. The Supreme Court held absence on various occasions in a short tenure of about seven years is gross indiscipline and the gravest act of misconduct under the first limb of Rule 16.2(1), with past record merely lending weight. It set aside the High Court judgment, dismissed the constable suit, and restored the dismissal with the absence period as non-duty. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.",
 "summary_verified": "Constable (No. 2-C/280) of the Punjab Armed Police, posted with the 2nd Commando Battalion at Bahadurgarh, overstayed one day casual leave from 2 April 1994 and rejoined only on 12 May 1994, having already faced three prior departmental actions for absence. The disciplinary authority dismissed him on 3 May 1996, but two civil courts decreed his challenge suit and the Punjab and Haryana High Court sustained that relief in second appeal. The Supreme Court held absence on various occasions in a short tenure of about seven years is gross indiscipline and the gravest act of misconduct under the first limb of Rule 16.2(1), with past record merely lending weight. It set aside the High Court judgment, dismissed the constable suit, and restored the dismissal with the absence period as non-duty.",
 "court_quote": "As such, it is concluded that the dismissal of the respondent was based on gravest act of misconduct, for which he was dealt with by the disciplinary authority following the procedure as prescribed and in due observance of principles of natural justice, hence, we do not find any fault in the same.",
 "court_quote_para": "33",
 "confidence": "high",
 "verdict": "accept",
 "verdict_note": "SC restored dismissal of habitual-absentee constable; pure service-discipline matter, no civilian victim.",
 "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": "2025-08-29",
   "action_type": "Order issued",
   "status": "Concluded",
   "authority": "Supreme Court of India",
   "independence": "External",
   "legal_effect": "Binding",
   "description": "The Supreme Court of India upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.",
   "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only",
   "source": "2025 INSC 1056; 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 857",
   "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.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/state-of-punjab-v-ex-c-satpal-singhwatermark-1740140.pdf",
   "link_checked": null
  },
  {
   "url": "https://s3.courtbook.in/2025/08/STATE-OF-PUNJAB-AND-OTHERS.pdf",
   "link_checked": null
  },
  {
   "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/past-misconduct-can-add-weight-to-dismissal-even-if-not-mentioned-in-show-cause-notice-supreme-court-302505",
   "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-77"
 ],
 "merged_case_id": "GAP2-60-005",
 "officers_named_public": 0,
 "record_flag": null,
 "service": "police",
 "watch": "babuwatch"
}