{ "state": "Delhi", "slug": "delhi", "count": 116, "url": "https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/state/delhi", "cases": [ { "record_id": "CW-1958-0001", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0439", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Police Constable v. Delhi Administration (and connected appeal)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Police Constable v. Delhi Administration (and connected appeal)", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Delhi Police", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Police Constable v. Delhi Administration (and connected appeal)", "case_number": "Criminal Appeals Nos. 202-203 of 1957", "citation": "AIR 1958 SC 350; 1958 SCR 1218", "judges": [ "S. J. Imam", "B. P. Sinha" ], "judgment_date": "1958-02-06", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1958, "incident_date": "1955-11-06", "incident_year": 1955, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1947 s.5(2)", "IPC 120B", "IPC 224/109" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Police Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.04, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Police Constable, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Police Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.07, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Police Constable, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 0, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/794096/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of two Delhi police constables, led by [name withheld], upholding their conviction by the Special Judge, Delhi under Section 120B and Section 224/109 IPC and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The Court found that between 6 and 16 November 1955 they conspired to bring about the escape of undertrial M.P. Khare from lawful custody, agreeing to accept illegal gratification and abetting the escape, with gratification accepted from Nand Parkash Kapur. It rejected the challenge to the approver's pardon granted by the District Magistrate under Section 337 CrPC 1898, holding a Special Judge's court is a Court of Session for that purpose. The sentence of two years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 5(2) and nine months under each IPC count stands. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of two Delhi police constables, led by [name withheld], upholding their conviction by the Special Judge, Delhi under Section 120B and Section 224/109 IPC and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The Court found that between 6 and 16 November 1955 they conspired to bring about the escape of undertrial M.P. Khare from lawful custody, agreeing to accept illegal gratification and abetting the escape, with gratification accepted from Nand Parkash Kapur. It rejected the challenge to the approver's pardon granted by the District Magistrate under Section 337 CrPC 1898, holding a Special Judge's court is a Court of Session for that purpose. The sentence of two years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 5(2) and nine months under each IPC count stands.", "court_quote": "The findings of the High Court establish the offence of the appellants under s. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and we can find no sufficient reason to think that the appellants were wrongly convicted thereunder. The appeals are accordingly dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "n/a", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; two constables' s.5(2) PC Act 1947 conviction upheld.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "AIR 1958 SC 350; 1958 SCR 1218", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "1958-02-06", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "AIR 1958 SC 350; 1958 SCR 1218", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/794096/", "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-38" ], "merged_case_id": "SWBRIBER-012", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1968-0001", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0544", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police personnel vs Delhi Administration", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police personnel vs Delhi Administration", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Andrews Ganj", "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police personnel vs Delhi Administration", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 124 of 1966", "citation": "AIR 1968 SC 1419; (1969) 1 SCR 183", "judges": [ "V. Ramaswami", "C.A. Vaidialingam" ], "judgment_date": "1968-05-01", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1968, "incident_date": "1963-08-29", "incident_year": 1963, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory_display": "extortion", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1947 s.5(2)", "IPC 161" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": null, "role": "convicted", "unit": "Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.04, "jev_p_culpable": 0.98, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Andrews Ganj man" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "female", "descriptor": "Andrews Ganj woman" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Andrews Ganj man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 3, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/392942/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609ab4ee4b014971140c2a8", "https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/index.php?go=1968/may/shiv-raj-singh-vs-delhi-administration-insc-137-1-may-1968-4" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. Police officer went in uniform to an Andrews Ganj man's Andrews Ganj house on 29 August 1963, accused the family of disposing of an illegitimate child, and demanded Rs.1,000 to save them from prosecution, taking Rs.90 plus a written undertaking and seizing a gold ring from an Andrews Ganj man An anti-corruption trap on 4 September 1963 recovered marked Rs.700 notes from his pocket. The Special Judge convicted him under s.5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 and s.161 IPC, and the Punjab High Court affirmed the two-year concurrent RI sentences while setting aside the fine. The Supreme Court held that obtaining money by threatening an imaginary prosecution still constitutes illegal gratification and criminal misconduct, and dismissed the appeal.", "summary_verified": "Police officer went in uniform to an Andrews Ganj man's Andrews Ganj house on 29 August 1963, accused the family of disposing of an illegitimate child, and demanded Rs.1,000 to save them from prosecution, taking Rs.90 plus a written undertaking and seizing a gold ring from an Andrews Ganj man An anti-corruption trap on 4 September 1963 recovered marked Rs.700 notes from his pocket. The Special Judge convicted him under s.5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 and s.161 IPC, and the Punjab High Court affirmed the two-year concurrent RI sentences while setting aside the fine. The Supreme Court held that obtaining money by threatening an imaginary prosecution still constitutes illegal gratification and criminal misconduct, and dismissed the appeal.", "court_quote": "Upon the finding of the High Court in this case it is manifest that the appellant grossly abused his position as a police officer and extorted money from an Andrews Ganj man and his wife and also a gold ring from an Andrews Ganj man", "court_quote_para": "n/a", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC affirmed 2-year RI conviction of Delhi police officer for bribe/extortion via trap recovery.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "AIR 1968 SC 1419; (1969) 1 SCR 183", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "1968-05-01", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "AIR 1968 SC 1419; (1969) 1 SCR 183", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/392942/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609ab4ee4b014971140c2a8", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/index.php?go=1968/may/shiv-raj-singh-vs-delhi-administration-insc-137-1-may-1968-4", "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-33", "chunk-41" ], "merged_case_id": "SWEXTORT-009", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1969-0001", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1107", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Union of India vs Delhi Police Sub-Inspector", "display_title_redacted": "Union of India vs Delhi Police Sub-Inspector", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Daryaganj, Delhi", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Union of India vs Delhi Police Sub-Inspector", "case_number": "Civil Appeal No. 1111 of 1965", "citation": "AIR 1970 SC 122; (1969) 2 SCC 108", "judges": [ "M. Hidayatullah", "J. C. Shah", "V. Ramaswami", "A. N. Grover", "G. K. Mitter" ], "judgment_date": "1969-04-01", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1969, "incident_date": "1949-01-01", "incident_year": 1949, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Police Station Daryaganj, Delhi Police", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Police Station Daryaganj, Delhi Police" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/825886/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/index.php?go=1969/april/union-of-india-vs-jagjit-singh-insc-97-1-april-1969-1" ], "summary": "The Supreme Court on 1 April 1969 allowed the Union's appeal and dismissed Sub-Inspector's suit, restoring his 1949 dismissal from the Delhi Police. The Court found that the Daryaganj SI had been found guilty in a departmental enquiry of accepting a bribe connected with a criminal case. It held that the re-employed Deputy Superintendent remained a superior police officer competent to hold the enquiry, that city Superintendents of Police were competent dismissing authorities, and that oral evidence proved substantial compliance with Rule 16.38 of the Punjab Police Rules. The dismissal was restored with no order as to costs and no compensation. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court on 1 April 1969 allowed the Union's appeal and dismissed Sub-Inspector's suit, restoring his 1949 dismissal from the Delhi Police. The Court found that the Daryaganj SI had been found guilty in a departmental enquiry of accepting a bribe connected with a criminal case. It held that the re-employed Deputy Superintendent remained a superior police officer competent to hold the enquiry, that city Superintendents of Police were competent dismissing authorities, and that oral evidence proved substantial compliance with Rule 16.38 of the Punjab Police Rules. The dismissal was restored with no order as to costs and no compensation.", "court_quote": "The respondent was found guilty of the charge and was dismissed from service by the order dated December 8, 1949, passed by one Jagannath, a Superintendent of Police in the Delhi Police Force.", "court_quote_para": "n/a", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC restored dismissal of Daryaganj SI for bribe-taking; enquiry-officer status and SP competence upheld.", "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": "1969-04-01", "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": "AIR 1970 SC 122; (1969) 2 SCC 108", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." } ], "later_proceedings": [], "final_outcome_url": null, "followup_history": [], "followup_status": "never_checked", "last_checked": null, "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/825886/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/index.php?go=1969/april/union-of-india-vs-jagjit-singh-insc-97-1-april-1969-1", "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-98" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-127-016", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1974-0003", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1161", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs The State", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable vs The State", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Kashmere Gate", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs The State", "case_number": "Crl.A. No. 186 of 1972", "citation": "10(1974)DLT197", "judges": [ "P.S. Safeer" ], "judgment_date": "1974-04-19", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1974, "incident_date": "1969-07-15", "incident_year": 1969, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1947 s.5(2)", "PC Act 1947 s.5(1)(d)", "IPC 161" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Police Station Kashmere Gate, Delhi", "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, Police Station Kashmere Gate, Delhi" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1673043/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/91976/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (P.S. Safeer, J.) on 19 April 1974 dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police constable of Police Station Kashmere Gate and upheld his conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs 60 bribe to release scooter-rickshaw DLR-5813. The court held the Anti-Corruption trap evidence proved demand and acceptance, with phenolphthalein-treated notes recovered after the appellant threw them across a wall on seeing the raiding Inspector. It held the presumption under Section 4(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 arose against him and the defence version had no veracity. The concurrent sentences of two years rigorous imprisonment and Rs 500 fine were maintained; the Supreme Court dismissed the further appeal on 15 February 1980 (AIR 1980 SC 873).", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (P.S. Safeer, J.) on 19 April 1974 dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police constable of Police Station Kashmere Gate and upheld his conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs 60 bribe to release scooter-rickshaw DLR-5813. The court held the Anti-Corruption trap evidence proved demand and acceptance, with phenolphthalein-treated notes recovered after the appellant threw them across a wall on seeing the raiding Inspector. It held the presumption under Section 4(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 arose against him and the defence version had no veracity. The concurrent sentences of two years rigorous imprisonment and Rs 500 fine were maintained; the Supreme Court dismissed the further appeal on 15 February 1980 (AIR 1980 SC 873).", "court_quote": "An over-all appreciation of evidence on the record leads to the conclusion that the prosecution succeeded in bringing home the guilt to the accused. The defense version did not contain even an iota of veracity. There is no justification for interfering with the conviction or the sentence imposed.", "court_quote_para": "5", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC upheld PC Act bribery conviction of constable on trap evidence; SC affirmed in 1980.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "10(1974)DLT197", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "1974-04-19", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "10(1974)DLT197", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1673043/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/91976/", "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-106" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-37-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1976-0001", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0350", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable v. State (Delhi Administration)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Head Constable v. State (Delhi Administration)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Lahori Gate Police Station", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable v. State (Delhi Administration)", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 209 of 1971", "citation": "(1976) 1 SCC 644; AIR 1976 SC 449", "judges": [ "P. K. Goswami", "P. N. Shingal" ], "judgment_date": "1976-01-08", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1976, "incident_date": "1969-04-08", "incident_year": 1969, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 161", "PC Act 1947 s.5(2)", "PC Act 1947 s.5(1)(d)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Lahori Gate Police Station, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.04, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Lahori Gate Police Station, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 1, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/540986/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/index.php?go=1976/january/maha-singh-vs-state-insc-2-8-january-1976-2" ], "summary": "The Supreme Court dismissed Criminal Appeal 209 of 1971 and upheld the conviction of Head Constable of Lahori Gate police station under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(2)/5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947, already affirmed by the Delhi High Court. The Court found complainant [name withheld], an unlicensed hawker, complained on 7 April 1969 that the Head Constable demanded Rs 10 for not challaning his brother and Rs 50 for future immunity, and an Anti-Corruption trap caught him with the money passing into his pocket. It held trap witnesses are neither accomplices nor interested per se and rejected the charge-prejudice and planting defences. The 1-year RI sentences with Rs 100 fine were maintained and surrender directed. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court dismissed Criminal Appeal 209 of 1971 and upheld the conviction of Head Constable of Lahori Gate police station under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(2)/5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947, already affirmed by the Delhi High Court. The Court found complainant [name withheld], an unlicensed hawker, complained on 7 April 1969 that the Head Constable demanded Rs 10 for not challaning his brother and Rs 50 for future immunity, and an Anti-Corruption trap caught him with the money passing into his pocket. It held trap witnesses are neither accomplices nor interested per se and rejected the charge-prejudice and planting defences. The 1-year RI sentences with Rs 100 fine were maintained and surrender directed.", "court_quote": "The High Court and the trial court cannot, therefore, be said to have made any gross error of law in appreciating the evidence and coming to the conclusion that the charges against the accused were fully established.", "court_quote_para": "n/a", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC judgment verified via mirror (primary 429); Head Constable bribery conviction upheld, surrender directed.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(1976) 1 SCC 644; AIR 1976 SC 449", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "1976-01-08", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(1976) 1 SCC 644; AIR 1976 SC 449", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/540986/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/index.php?go=1976/january/maha-singh-vs-state-insc-2-8-january-1976-2", "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-37" ], "merged_case_id": "SWBRIBER-016", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1977-0002", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0782", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Man vs [name withheld] and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Man vs [name withheld] and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Kotwali Police Station, Chandni Chowk", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Man vs [name withheld] and Others", "case_number": "RFA 10-D of 1964 with RFA 179-D of 1963", "citation": "(1977) CriLJ 1984 : ILR (1977) Delhi 549", "judges": [ "B.C. Misra" ], "judgment_date": "1977-01-14", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1977, "incident_date": "1957-03-21", "incident_year": 1957, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory_display": "illegal detention false imprisonment", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "CrPC s.54 (as then in force)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector (Station House Officer)", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Kotwali Police Station, Chandni Chowk, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:no_row" ], "ledger_role": null, "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "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": "Sub-Inspector (Station House Officer), Kotwali Police Station, Chandni Chowk, Delhi Police" }, { "name": "Naut Ram Yadav", "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Kotwali Police Station, Chandni Chowk, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.08, "jev_p_culpable": 0.91, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Naut Ram Yadav", "display": "Naut Ram Yadav (Assistant Sub-Inspector)" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 12500, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/596273/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/683258/ram-pyare-lal-vs-om-parkash-ors" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court held two Kotwali police officers personally liable for the false imprisonment of advocate a Delhi man, whom ASI Naut Ram Yadav arrested from court premises on 21 March 1957 relying on stale register entries that wrongly showed him as a proclaimed offender despite his discharge by a Magistrate in 1950. The Court found the ASI had arrested the plaintiff without verification despite his protests and held SHO liable for directing the drive and negligently failing to supervise the incorrect registers. It dismissed the Union of India's appeal, partly allowed the plaintiff's appeal, and decreed Rs 12,500 in damages jointly and severally against both officers and the Union of India, while recommending the Government consider action over the wrong register entries.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court held two Kotwali police officers personally liable for the false imprisonment of advocate a Delhi man, whom ASI Naut Ram Yadav arrested from court premises on 21 March 1957 relying on stale register entries that wrongly showed him as a proclaimed offender despite his discharge by a Magistrate in 1950. The Court found the ASI had arrested the plaintiff without verification despite his protests and held SHO liable for directing the drive and negligently failing to supervise the incorrect registers. It dismissed the Union of India's appeal, partly allowed the plaintiff's appeal, and decreed Rs 12,500 in damages jointly and severally against both officers and the Union of India, while recommending the Government consider action over the wrong register entries.", "court_quote": "We, therefore, find that defendant No. 2 is fully guilty of the tort of false imprisonment.", "court_quote_para": "18", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC held two named Delhi Police officers personally liable for false imprisonment; Rs 12,500 decreed jointly and severally.", "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": "1977-01-14", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 12,500.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "(1977) CriLJ 1984 : ILR (1977) Delhi 549", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/596273/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/683258/ram-pyare-lal-vs-om-parkash-ors", "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-59" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-17-003", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1980-0001", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0443", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Police Constable v. Delhi Administration", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Police Constable v. Delhi Administration", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Kashmere Gate, Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Kashmere Gate Police Station", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Police Constable v. Delhi Administration", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 211 of 1974", "citation": "1980 SCC (2) 390; AIR 1980 SC 873", "judges": [ "R.S. Sarkaria", "O. Chinnappa Reddy" ], "judgment_date": "1980-02-15", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1980, "incident_date": "1969-07-12", "incident_year": 1969, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1947 s.5(1)(d)/5(2)", "IPC 161" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Police Constable", "unit": "Kashmere Gate Police Station, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.04, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Police Constable, Kashmere Gate Police Station, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Kashmere Gate, Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/91976/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://acbmaharashtra.gov.in/files/judgment29.pdf" ], "summary": "The Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal No. 211 of 1974, by special leave) dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of Delhi Police Constable, already confirmed by the Delhi High Court (Crl. A. No. 186/72): two years' rigorous imprisonment on each of the two counts (plus Rs 500 fine on the first count), to run concurrently. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal No. 211 of 1974, by special leave) dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of Delhi Police Constable, already confirmed by the Delhi High Court (Crl. A. No. 186/72): two years' rigorous imprisonment on each of the two counts (plus Rs 500 fine on the first count), to run concurrently.", "court_quote": "The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.", "court_quote_para": null, "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC judgment text verified; police constable bribery conviction under PC Act 1947 + IPC 161 upheld.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "1980 SCC (2) 390; AIR 1980 SC 873", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "1980-02-15", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "1980 SCC (2) 390; AIR 1980 SC 873", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "summary" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/91976/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://acbmaharashtra.gov.in/files/judgment29.pdf", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-39" ], "merged_case_id": "SWBRIBER-017", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1983-0002", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0781", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "State (Delhi Administration) vs Khem Chand", "display_title_redacted": "State (Delhi Administration) vs Khem Chand", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi (Patel Nagar)", "police_station_or_unit": "Patel Nagar Police Station", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "State (Delhi Administration) vs Khem Chand", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 42 of 1977", "citation": "25(1984)DLT134", "judges": [ "R.N. Aggarwal", "Malik Sharief-Ud-Din" ], "judgment_date": "1983-11-24", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1983, "incident_date": "1975-09-19", "incident_year": 1975, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_by_hc", "sections": [ "IPC 161", "PC Act 1947 s.5(1)(d)", "PC Act 1947 s.5(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Khem Chand", "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Patel Nagar Police Station, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.04, "jev_p_culpable": 0.98, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Khem Chand", "display": "Khem Chand (Sub-Inspector)" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 0.08, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1809913/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/685203/state-delhi-administration-vs-khem-chand" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Complainant [name withheld] reported an assault and trespass at Patel Nagar police station, where a Section 452 IPC case was entrusted to Sub-Inspector Khem Chand; on 19 September 1975 Khem Chand told him his case was weak and demanded Rs. 100 and wine to champion his cause. The Anti-Corruption Branch laid a trap at the complainant's residence on 20 September 1975, where the accused accepted the bribe and the money was recovered from him. The Special Judge acquitted him on 30 October 1976 holding the demand unproved. The court held the Special Judge's approach basically erroneous, found the trap, recovery and phenolphthalein evidence proved acceptance, reversed the acquittal, convicted him under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(2)/5(1)(d) PC Act 1947, and, recording special reasons, sentenced him to one month RI plus Rs. 100 fine (concurrent) with a direction to surrender forthwith. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Complainant [name withheld] reported an assault and trespass at Patel Nagar police station, where a Section 452 IPC case was entrusted to Sub-Inspector Khem Chand; on 19 September 1975 Khem Chand told him his case was weak and demanded Rs. 100 and wine to champion his cause. The Anti-Corruption Branch laid a trap at the complainant's residence on 20 September 1975, where the accused accepted the bribe and the money was recovered from him. The Special Judge acquitted him on 30 October 1976 holding the demand unproved. The court held the Special Judge's approach basically erroneous, found the trap, recovery and phenolphthalein evidence proved acceptance, reversed the acquittal, convicted him under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(2)/5(1)(d) PC Act 1947, and, recording special reasons, sentenced him to one month RI plus Rs. 100 fine (concurrent) with a direction to surrender forthwith.", "court_quote": "We, therefore, accept this appeal, reverse the finding of learned Special Judge and hold the accused guilty under section 161 Indian Penal Code and Section 5(2) read with section 5(1)(d) Prevention of Corruption Act and convict him accordingly.", "court_quote_para": "25", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Acquittal reversed on State appeal; SI convicted of bribery under s.161 IPC and PC Act 1947.", "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": "1983-11-24", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "25(1984)DLT134", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1809913/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/685203/state-delhi-administration-vs-khem-chand", "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-58" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-17-002", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1984-0002", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1162", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "State (Delhi Administration) vs Delhi Police Constable", "display_title_redacted": "State (Delhi Administration) vs Delhi Police Constable", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Defence Colony", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "State (Delhi Administration) vs Delhi Police Constable", "case_number": null, "citation": "(1985) CriLJ 1190", "judges": [ "R.N. Aggarwal", "Malik Sharief-Ud-Din" ], "judgment_date": "1984-05-03", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1984, "incident_date": "1980-02-20", "incident_year": 1980, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_by_hc", "sections": [ "Delhi Police Act s.91", "Delhi Police Act s.93", "Delhi Police Act s.97" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "New Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "fine", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/379592/state-delhi-administration-appellant-hash-sube-singh-respondent-1/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/882083/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (R.N. Aggarwal and Malik Sharief-Ud-Din, JJ.) on 3 May 1984 allowed the State's acquittal appeal and restored the Metropolitan Magistrate's conviction of Delhi Police constable for drunken disorderly conduct and abuse outside House B-52, Kidwai Nagar, on the night of 20/21 February 1980. The court held the evidence of police witnesses who testified against a colleague, corroborated by the householder, was trustworthy, and that proof of intoxication was immaterial since the Delhi Police Act punishes indecent and disorderly behaviour regardless. It held no sanction under Section 197 CrPC was needed because abusing people and unruly conduct are not remotely connected with official duty. The acquittal dated 4 May 1983 was set aside and the fine of Rs 100 (in default 7 days simple imprisonment) restored. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (R.N. Aggarwal and Malik Sharief-Ud-Din, JJ.) on 3 May 1984 allowed the State's acquittal appeal and restored the Metropolitan Magistrate's conviction of Delhi Police constable for drunken disorderly conduct and abuse outside House B-52, Kidwai Nagar, on the night of 20/21 February 1980. The court held the evidence of police witnesses who testified against a colleague, corroborated by the householder, was trustworthy, and that proof of intoxication was immaterial since the Delhi Police Act punishes indecent and disorderly behaviour regardless. It held no sanction under Section 197 CrPC was needed because abusing people and unruly conduct are not remotely connected with official duty. The acquittal dated 4 May 1983 was set aside and the fine of Rs 100 (in default 7 days simple imprisonment) restored.", "court_quote": "we hereby set aside his judgment dt. 4-5-1983 by which he has acquitted the respondent and we restore and affirm the judgment of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate dt. 3-4-1981", "court_quote_para": "13", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC reversed acquittal and restored magistrate conviction of constable; sanction held not required.", "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": "1984-05-03", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(1985) CriLJ 1190", "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/379592/state-delhi-administration-appellant-hash-sube-singh-respondent-1/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/882083/", "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-106" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-37-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1989-0004", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0755", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Resident v. Police Commissioner, Delhi Police Headquarters", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Resident v. Police Commissioner, Delhi Police Headquarters", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Resident v. Police Commissioner, Delhi Police Headquarters", "case_number": null, "citation": "(1989) 4 SCC 730", "judges": [ "G. L. Oza", "K. N. Saikia" ], "judgment_date": "1989-01-13", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1989, "incident_date": "1988-01-01", "incident_year": 1988, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "SHO", "unit": null, "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": "SHO" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "female", "descriptor": "Delhi woman" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 10, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 50700, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1600010/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Supreme Court recorded the DCP's frank admission of police atrocity and awarded compensation to ten victims. Delhi Police had collected poor labourers, took them to the police station for unpaid work, and on demand of wages beat them; a Delhi resident succumbed to injuries and his body was disposed of, while the survivor was stripped and thrashed. The court directed Rs 50,000 for the deceased's family (invested via LIC for monthly support), Rs 500 for the survivor and Rs 25 each for the other eight, recoverable from the guilty officers' salaries after show cause. It noted the SHO had been arrested and criminal prosecution was underway, and preserved further lawful compensation claims. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court recorded the DCP's frank admission of police atrocity and awarded compensation to ten victims. Delhi Police had collected poor labourers, took them to the police station for unpaid work, and on demand of wages beat them; a Delhi resident succumbed to injuries and his body was disposed of, while the survivor was stripped and thrashed. The court directed Rs 50,000 for the deceased's family (invested via LIC for monthly support), Rs 500 for the survivor and Rs 25 each for the other eight, recoverable from the guilty officers' salaries after show cause. It noted the SHO had been arrested and criminal prosecution was underway, and preserved further lawful compensation claims.", "court_quote": "It is an unfortunate case where the police collected poor people and took them to the Police Station for doing some work. They were asked to work without labour charges. On demand they were beaten and it appears that one of them a Delhi resident succumbed to the injuries and the body has also been disposed of.", "court_quote_para": "2", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC recorded DCP admission of atrocity; compensated 10 victims; SHO arrested.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "1989-01-13", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 50,700.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "(1989) 4 SCC 730", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1600010/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-03", "chunk-r02" ], "merged_case_id": "SWCUSTOD-012", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1989-0002", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0105", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Anand Parbat, Patel Nagar Boy vs Commissioner of Police, Delhi Police Headquarters", "display_title_redacted": "Anand Parbat, Patel Nagar Boy vs Commissioner of Police, Delhi Police Headquarters", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Anand Parbat, Patel Nagar", "police_station_or_unit": "Anand Parbat Police Station, Delhi Police", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Anand Parbat, Patel Nagar Boy vs Commissioner of Police, Delhi Police Headquarters", "case_number": "Writ Petitions (Criminal) under Article 32 (Saheli)", "citation": "1990 (1) SCC 422; AIR 1990 SC 513", "judges": [ "B.C. Ray", "S.R. Pandian" ], "judgment_date": "1989-12-14", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1989, "incident_date": "1987-11-14", "incident_year": 1987, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "disproportionate_force", "subcategory": "disproportionate_force", "subcategory_display": "disproportionate force", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": "Lal Singh", "rank": "Station House Officer", "unit": "Anand Parbat Police Station, Delhi Police", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_openrouter:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_gpt56:unclear(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": "unclear", "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.1, "jev_p_culpable": 0.66, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Lal Singh", "display": "Lal Singh (Station House Officer)" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Anand Parbat Police Station, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Anand Parbat Police Station, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 4, "victims": [ { "age": 9, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Anand Parbat, Patel Nagar boy, age 9", "name": null }, { "age": null, "gender": "female", "descriptor": "Anand Parbat, Patel Nagar woman", "name": null } ], "victims_redacted": [ { "age": 9, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "a 9-year-old boy" }, { "age": null, "gender": "female", "descriptor": "a woman" } ], "anonymised": true, "victim_count": 2, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 75000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/467223/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Supreme Court (B.C. Ray, J.) held the 9-year-old son of one of two tenant women was done to death by beating and assault by SHO Lal Singh, and directed Delhi Administration to pay the mother 75,000 compensation within four weeks, recoverable from officers found responsible. The Court relied on the Crime Branch Inspector's report (finding police conspiracy with the landlords who wanted the Anand Parbat rooms vacated) and the DCP's counter-affidavit admitting the SHO took part in the beating; the child's grievous leg injury caused fever and pneumonitis resulting in death, and a criminal case (first 308/34, altered to 304/34 IPC) was registered. The Court stated its observations would not have a bearing on the pending criminal prosecution of the police officials.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court (B.C. Ray, J.) held the 9-year-old son of one of two tenant women was done to death by beating and assault by SHO Lal Singh, and directed Delhi Administration to pay the mother 75,000 compensation within four weeks, recoverable from officers found responsible. The Court relied on the Crime Branch Inspector's report (finding police conspiracy with the landlords who wanted the Anand Parbat rooms vacated) and the DCP's counter-affidavit admitting the SHO took part in the beating; the child's grievous leg injury caused fever and pneumonitis resulting in death, and a criminal case (first 308/34, altered to 304/34 IPC) was registered. The Court stated its observations would not have a bearing on the pending criminal prosecution of the police officials.", "court_quote": "[a 9-year-old boy] was done to death on account of the beating and assault by the agency of the sovereign power acting in violation and excess of the power vested in such agency.", "court_quote_para": null, "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Primary judgment verified: SC held 9-year-old beaten to death by SHO; Rs 75,000 to mother.", "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": "1989-12-14", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 75,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "1990 (1) SCC 422; AIR 1990 SC 513", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "officers", "summary" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/467223/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-15", "chunk-r09" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-014", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1992-0005", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0122", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Man and Others vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Man and Others vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Lahori Gate, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Man and Others vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "case_number": null, "citation": "1993 ACJ 393; 48 (1992) DLT 714", "judges": [ "Anil Dev Singh" ], "judgment_date": "1992-04-22", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1992, "incident_date": "1991-05-02", "incident_year": 1991, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "IPC 304", "IPC 330", "IPC 348", "IPC 34" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Station Lahori Gate, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.93, "jev_p_culpable": 0.11, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Station Lahori Gate, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "unit": "Police Station Lahori Gate, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:no_row", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:unclear", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": null, "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "unclear", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": null, "jev_p_culpable": null, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, Police Station Lahori Gate, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 100000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/579717/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/43971311/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 1 lakh plus a job to the family of a Delhi man, beaten to death at PS Lahori Gate. Picked up hale and hearty by Constable on mere suspicion in the wee hours of 2 May 1991, he reached St. Stephen Hospital unconscious the same day with 16 ante-mortem injuries and died of cerebral damage on 10 May; the SDM inquest found severe beating in the police station and FIR 430/1991 was lodged against the constable. The Court held the family must be given adequate compensation for the custodial killing, recoverable from the erring officers after trial, while clarifying its observations would not prejudice the criminal proceedings. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 1 lakh plus a job to the family of a Delhi man, beaten to death at PS Lahori Gate. Picked up hale and hearty by Constable on mere suspicion in the wee hours of 2 May 1991, he reached St. Stephen Hospital unconscious the same day with 16 ante-mortem injuries and died of cerebral damage on 10 May; the SDM inquest found severe beating in the police station and FIR 430/1991 was lodged against the constable. The Court held the family must be given adequate compensation for the custodial killing, recoverable from the erring officers after trial, while clarifying its observations would not prejudice the criminal proceedings.", "court_quote": "According to the inquest report the deceased before his death was given severe beating in the police station.", "court_quote_para": "3", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Suspicion-pickup beaten to death; Rs 1L plus widow's job, recoverable from erring officers.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "1992-04-22", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 100,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "1993 ACJ 393; 48 (1992) DLT 714", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/579717/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/43971311/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-36" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-031", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1993-0002", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0458", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Woman v. Delhi Administration & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Woman v. Delhi Administration & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Model Town", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Woman v. Delhi Administration & Ors.", "case_number": "Writ Petition No. 728/1991", "citation": "LAWS(SC)-1993-3-147", "judges": [], "judgment_date": "1993-03-19", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1993, "incident_date": "1990-08-21", "incident_year": 1990, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Inspector", "unit": "PS Model Town, Delhi Police", "role": "unclear", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:unclear", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "unclear", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.93, "jev_p_culpable": 0.07, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Inspector, PS Model Town, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "unit": "PS Model Town, Delhi Police", "role": "unclear", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:unclear", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "unclear", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.92, "jev_p_culpable": 0.08, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, PS Model Town, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "unit": "PS Model Town, Delhi Police", "role": "unclear", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:unclear", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "unclear", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.92, "jev_p_culpable": 0.07, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, PS Model Town, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 3, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 300000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/browse/Case?CaseId=003991911100&Title=MRS.-VEER-BALA-Vs.-DELHI-ADMINISTRATION-AND-OTHERS", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/177208/", "https://www.amnesty.org/fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/asa200261993en.pdf" ], "summary": "The Supreme Court order (19 March 1993, text served at the primary source) directed Delhi Administration to pay Smt. Veer Bala Rs 3,00,000 within four weeks as immediate relief (Rs 50,000 each in fixed deposit for her two minor children, Rs 2,00,000 for maintenance/education; without prejudice to higher claims) for the death of her husband [name withheld] in police custody on the night of 21/22 August 1990 at PS Model Town, and recorded that prosecution sanctions would reach the CBI by 23.3.93 with charge-sheets to follow. The 1993 order names no officer. The CBI chargesheet (per Delhi HC 28 August 2001, Crl. A. 192/1995 etc.) framed ss.304/34 + 342/34 charges against [name withheld] [name withheld], [name withheld], [name withheld] and [name withheld], and s.218/109 charges against [name withheld] and SDM R.S. Yadav; the trial court convicted [name withheld], [name withheld] (ss.342, 304-II/34) and Yadav (s.218); the High Court set all convictions aside and acquitted all of them, dismissing the State appeal (Crl. A. 18/1996). Later proceedings noted in the ledger: the Delhi High Court on 28 August 2001 set aside the related trial-court convictions and acquitted [name withheld] [name withheld] and [name withheld] of all charges (no conviction had been recorded against [name withheld], and the State appeal was dismissed); the compensation direction in this record stands on this judgment's own findings. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court order (19 March 1993, text served at the primary source) directed Delhi Administration to pay Smt. Veer Bala Rs 3,00,000 within four weeks as immediate relief (Rs 50,000 each in fixed deposit for her two minor children, Rs 2,00,000 for maintenance/education; without prejudice to higher claims) for the death of her husband [name withheld] in police custody on the night of 21/22 August 1990 at PS Model Town, and recorded that prosecution sanctions would reach the CBI by 23.3.93 with charge-sheets to follow. The 1993 order names no officer. The CBI chargesheet (per Delhi HC 28 August 2001, Crl. A. 192/1995 etc.) framed ss.304/34 + 342/34 charges against [name withheld] [name withheld], [name withheld], [name withheld] and [name withheld], and s.218/109 charges against [name withheld] and SDM R.S. Yadav; the trial court convicted [name withheld], [name withheld] (ss.342, 304-II/34) and Yadav (s.218); the High Court set all convictions aside and acquitted all of them, dismissing the State appeal (Crl. A. 18/1996).", "court_quote": "Taking into consideration all the facts on record, we are of the view that the Delhi Administration should give to the petitioner Smt. Veer Bala compensation of Rs. 3,00,000.00 within four weeks from today as an immediate measure.", "court_quote_para": "2", "confidence": "medium", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC awarded Rs 3L compensation for Model Town custodial death; prosecution directed.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "1993-03-19", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 300,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "LAWS(SC)-1993-3-147", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote_para", "officers", "summary" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/browse/Case?CaseId=003991911100&Title=MRS.-VEER-BALA-Vs.-DELHI-ADMINISTRATION-AND-OTHERS", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/177208/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.amnesty.org/fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/asa200261993en.pdf", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-42" ], "merged_case_id": "SWCUSTOD-029", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1993-0004", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0118", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Kashmere Gate Man vs State (Delhi Administration)", "display_title_redacted": "Kashmere Gate Man vs State (Delhi Administration)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Kashmere Gate", "police_station_or_unit": "P.S. Kashmere Gate", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Kashmere Gate Man vs State (Delhi Administration)", "case_number": null, "citation": "I (1995) ACC 432", "judges": [ "Y.K. Sabharwal" ], "judgment_date": "1993-08-19", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1993, "incident_date": "1991-08-15", "incident_year": 1991, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory_display": "illegal detention false imprisonment", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Kashmere Gate man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 20000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/317048/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Y.K. Sabharwal, J.) awarded Rs 20,000 (payable within one month) plus Rs 1,100 costs for the illegal detention of the wrong man for one month and nine days. Assistant Mistri a Kashmere Gate man was arrested on 15 August 1991 as the namesake proclaimed offender wanted since 1983 — though his father's name (not Ram Singh) and address differed from the charge-sheet — and, despite protesting from arrest and again on 16.8.1991, was refused bail by the Magistrate and once by the Sessions Court before another Sessions Judge granted bail (released 23.9.1991); a Magisterial enquiry (26.9.1992, with the unnamed 1983 Investigating Officer confirming he was not the man) proved the mistaken identity. The Court held the petitioner was deprived of liberty by the casual, irresponsible, careless and negligent acts of unnamed police officers who paid no heed to his protests, leaving the State free to fix responsibility, recover the award from officers at fault, and take lawful action against them. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Y.K. Sabharwal, J.) awarded Rs 20,000 (payable within one month) plus Rs 1,100 costs for the illegal detention of the wrong man for one month and nine days. Assistant Mistri a Kashmere Gate man was arrested on 15 August 1991 as the namesake proclaimed offender wanted since 1983 — though his father's name (not Ram Singh) and address differed from the charge-sheet — and, despite protesting from arrest and again on 16.8.1991, was refused bail by the Magistrate and once by the Sessions Court before another Sessions Judge granted bail (released 23.9.1991); a Magisterial enquiry (26.9.1992, with the unnamed 1983 Investigating Officer confirming he was not the man) proved the mistaken identity. The Court held the petitioner was deprived of liberty by the casual, irresponsible, careless and negligent acts of unnamed police officers who paid no heed to his protests, leaving the State free to fix responsibility, recover the award from officers at fault, and take lawful action against them.", "court_quote": "Clearly, the petitioner was deprived of his liberty because of casual, irresponsible, careless and negligent acts of the Police Officers.", "court_quote_para": "10", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; month-long detention of wrong man, Rs 20,000 + costs.", "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": "1993-08-19", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 20,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "I (1995) ACC 432", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "officers", "sections", "court_quote_para", "summary" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/317048/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-28" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-027", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1998-0004", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0110", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Geeta and Anr. vs Lt. Governor and Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Geeta and Anr. vs Lt. Governor and Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Sarojini Nagar", "police_station_or_unit": "P.S. Sarojini Nagar", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Geeta and Anr. vs Lt. Governor and Ors.", "case_number": null, "citation": "2000 ACJ 109; 75 (1998) DLT 822", "judges": [ "Anil Dev Singh" ], "judgment_date": "1998-08-18", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1998, "incident_date": "1996-08-29", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "IPC 304", "Constitution Art 21" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": null, "unit": "P.S. Sarojini Nagar", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.87, "jev_p_culpable": 0.29, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, P.S. Sarojini Nagar" } ], "officer_count": 8, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": 22, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Sarojini Nagar man, age 22" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 550000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1942298/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 5,50,000 to the widow and mother of 22-year-old a Sarojini Nagar man, who was tortured to death in Sarojini Nagar police custody. A Sarojini Nagar man, against whom there was no allegation of any criminal activity, was picked up on 29 August 1996 after his brother [name withheld] escaped from a police party; his body, bearing 51 injuries, was brought to Safdarjung Hospital the next day. The State admitted the custodial death and injuries, and an SDM Hauz Khas enquiry prima facie held eight policemen (respondents 3 to 10, arrested and challaned under Section 304 IPC) responsible. The Court deplored the continued preference for torture over scientific investigation and left the State free to recover the award from those found responsible. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 5,50,000 to the widow and mother of 22-year-old a Sarojini Nagar man, who was tortured to death in Sarojini Nagar police custody. A Sarojini Nagar man, against whom there was no allegation of any criminal activity, was picked up on 29 August 1996 after his brother [name withheld] escaped from a police party; his body, bearing 51 injuries, was brought to Safdarjung Hospital the next day. The State admitted the custodial death and injuries, and an SDM Hauz Khas enquiry prima facie held eight policemen (respondents 3 to 10, arrested and challaned under Section 304 IPC) responsible. The Court deplored the continued preference for torture over scientific investigation and left the State free to recover the award from those found responsible.", "court_quote": "It is not the case of the respondents that when he was arrested he was having injuries on his person. No explanation has been rendered for fifty one injuries which were found on his person as a result of which he died in police custody.", "court_quote_para": "8", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC order verified on Indian Kanoon; admitted custodial torture-death, Rs 5.5 lakh awarded.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "1998-08-18", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 550,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "2000 ACJ 109; 75 (1998) DLT 822", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1942298/", "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-28" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-019", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-1999-0008", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0121", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Pandav Nagar Man and Another vs Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "Pandav Nagar Man and Another vs Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Pandav Nagar", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Patel Nagar, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Pandav Nagar Man and Another vs Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi", "case_number": "Criminal Writ Petition No. 1015/98", "citation": "2000 III AD (Delhi) 474; 84 (2000) DLT 348", "judges": [ "Anil Dev Singh" ], "judgment_date": "1999-10-11", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 1999, "incident_date": "1993-11-29", "incident_year": 1993, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Police Station Patel Nagar, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.6, "jev_p_culpable": 0.61, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, Police Station Patel Nagar, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Station Patel Nagar, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.48, "jev_p_culpable": 0.64, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Station Patel Nagar, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Station Patel Nagar, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.51, "jev_p_culpable": 0.69, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Station Patel Nagar, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Station Patel Nagar, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.52, "jev_p_culpable": 0.62, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Station Patel Nagar, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 4, "victims": [ { "age": 21, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Pandav Nagar man, age 21" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 200000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/562113/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 2 lakh for the custodial killing of 21-year-old a Pandav Nagar man at PS Patel Nagar. Picked up on 29 November 1993 for interrogation, he was beaten to death within about 90 minutes; constables dumped his body at DDU Hospital claiming he was found near a railway track, and the first post-mortem opined poisoning. An NHRC-appointed Additional Sessions Judge's enquiry demolished the cover stories through independent witnesses and held one ASI and three constables responsible, a finding the Court adopted. The Court held it undoubtedly a custodial death by third-degree torture and ordered compensation over and above the NHRC's Rs 50,000 interim award. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 2 lakh for the custodial killing of 21-year-old a Pandav Nagar man at PS Patel Nagar. Picked up on 29 November 1993 for interrogation, he was beaten to death within about 90 minutes; constables dumped his body at DDU Hospital claiming he was found near a railway track, and the first post-mortem opined poisoning. An NHRC-appointed Additional Sessions Judge's enquiry demolished the cover stories through independent witnesses and held one ASI and three constables responsible, a finding the Court adopted. The Court held it undoubtedly a custodial death by third-degree torture and ordered compensation over and above the NHRC's Rs 50,000 interim award.", "court_quote": "In the circumstances, therefore, we have no manner of doubt that it is a case of custodial death.", "court_quote_para": "6", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "90-minute custodial killing with railway-track cover story; Rs 2L over NHRC interim award.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "1999-10-11", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 200,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "2000 III AD (Delhi) 474; 84 (2000) DLT 348", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/562113/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-36" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-030", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2000-0001", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0120", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Phoolwati @ Phullo vs National Capital Territory of Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "Phoolwati @ Phullo vs National Capital Territory of Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Siraspur", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Samaypur Badli, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Phoolwati @ Phullo vs National Capital Territory of Delhi", "case_number": null, "citation": "2000 II AD (Delhi) 537; 2000 CriLJ 1613; 84 (2000) DLT 177", "judges": [ "Anil Dev Singh" ], "judgment_date": "2000-02-04", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2000, "incident_date": "1992-12-02", "incident_year": 1992, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "Constitution Art. 226", "Constitution Art. 21", "CrPC 176" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "named_only", "unit": "Police Station Samaypur Badli, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:unclear", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "unclear", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.84, "jev_p_culpable": 0.21, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, Police Station Samaypur Badli, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "named_only", "unit": "Police Station Samaypur Badli, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.92, "jev_p_culpable": 0.1, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, Police Station Samaypur Badli, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "SHO", "role": "named_only", "unit": "Police Station Samaypur Badli, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.84, "jev_p_culpable": 0.32, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "SHO, Police Station Samaypur Badli, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "role": "named_only", "unit": "Police Station Samaypur Badli, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.92, "jev_p_culpable": 0.1, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, Police Station Samaypur Badli, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 7, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Siraspur man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 300000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/893577/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 3 lakh for the custodial death of a Siraspur man at PS Samaypur Badli. On 2 December 1992 a seven-man police party led by SI came looking for the victim's cousins, beat a Siraspur man with lathis at his Siraspur home and again at the police station; he died the next evening in custody at Hindu Rao Hospital of haemorrhagic shock from a fractured femur and multiple injuries. The SDM's Section 176 inquest held the death resulted from police beating, and the CBI chargesheeted seven policemen plus three private persons. The State offered no explanation for the injuries, and the Court held it vicariously liable under Article 21. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 3 lakh for the custodial death of a Siraspur man at PS Samaypur Badli. On 2 December 1992 a seven-man police party led by SI came looking for the victim's cousins, beat a Siraspur man with lathis at his Siraspur home and again at the police station; he died the next evening in custody at Hindu Rao Hospital of haemorrhagic shock from a fractured femur and multiple injuries. The SDM's Section 176 inquest held the death resulted from police beating, and the CBI chargesheeted seven policemen plus three private persons. The State offered no explanation for the injuries, and the Court held it vicariously liable under Article 21.", "court_quote": "From the perusal of the report of the S.D.M. it cannot be denied that the a Siraspur man died in police custody as a result of beating given by the police personnel.", "court_quote_para": "6", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Lathi-beating custodial death; Rs 3L compensation, seven policemen CBI-chargesheeted.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2000-02-04", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 300,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "2000 II AD (Delhi) 537; 2000 CriLJ 1613; 84 (2000) DLT 177", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/893577/", "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-36" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-029", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2000-0013", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0783", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Deputy Commissioner of Police vs Jorawar Singh and Another", "display_title_redacted": "Deputy Commissioner of Police vs Jorawar Singh and Another", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "9th Battalion, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Deputy Commissioner of Police vs Jorawar Singh and Another", "case_number": "C.W.P. No. 2611 of 1999", "citation": "2000 (iv) AD (Delhi) 873", "judges": [ "R.S. Sodhi" ], "judgment_date": "2000-04-07", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2000, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": null, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Constitution Art.226" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Jorawar Singh", "rank": "Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "9th Battalion, Delhi Police, New Delhi", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.26, "jev_p_culpable": 0.7, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Jorawar Singh", "display": "Jorawar Singh (Constable)" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1458205/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/920882/deputy-commissioner-of-police-appellant-hash-jorawar-singh-and-another-respondent/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court allowed the department's writ petition and restored the dismissal of Delhi Police constable Jorawar Singh, who had been dismissed on 29 April 1993 for habitual unauthorised absence after pleading guilty at the departmental enquiry. The Court held that the Supreme Court's decision in State of M.P. vs Harihar Gopal still held the field, that the two-Judge decision in Bakshish Singh was per incuriam on this point, and that treating the absence period as leave without pay was only for maintaining a correct service record and did not obliterate the dismissal. It found the termination suffered from no illegality, set aside the Central Administrative Tribunal's order dated 22 January 1999 which had quashed the dismissal, and made the Rule absolute. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court allowed the department's writ petition and restored the dismissal of Delhi Police constable Jorawar Singh, who had been dismissed on 29 April 1993 for habitual unauthorised absence after pleading guilty at the departmental enquiry. The Court held that the Supreme Court's decision in State of M.P. vs Harihar Gopal still held the field, that the two-Judge decision in Bakshish Singh was per incuriam on this point, and that treating the absence period as leave without pay was only for maintaining a correct service record and did not obliterate the dismissal. It found the termination suffered from no illegality, set aside the Central Administrative Tribunal's order dated 22 January 1999 which had quashed the dismissal, and made the Rule absolute.", "court_quote": "The order of the Tribunal dated 22nd January, 1999 in O.A. No. 901 of 1995 is set aside. The writ petition is allowed and the Rule made absolute.", "court_quote_para": "17", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC restored constable's dismissal for habitual absence; internal-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": "2000-04-07", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "2000 (iv) AD (Delhi) 873", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1458205/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/920882/deputy-commissioner-of-police-appellant-hash-jorawar-singh-and-another-respondent/", "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-59" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-17-004", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2000-0016", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1166", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Man vs State of Delhi and Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Man vs State of Delhi and Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Seelampur", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Man vs State of Delhi and Ors.", "case_number": null, "citation": "2001 ACJ 2033", "judges": [ "R.S. Sodhi" ], "judgment_date": "2000-11-17", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2000, "incident_date": "1994-08-27", "incident_year": 1994, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "CrPC 176" ], "officers": [], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": 68, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi man, age 68" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 350000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/938973/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/610196/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (R.S. Sodhi, J.) on 17 November 2000 allowed the writ petition of Iqubal Begam and directed the State to pay Rs 3,50,000 as compensation for the custodial death of her 68-year-old husband [name withheld] at Police Station Seelampur on 27/28 August 1994. The court held on the Section 176 CrPC magisterial-inquiry record, DD entries, MLC and post-mortem evidence of seven ante-mortem blunt-force abrasions that the deceased remained in continuous police custody from 7.50 p.m. until declared dead at 00.40 hrs, and that inflicted brutality had precipitated his fatal cardiac condition. It held the State and its functionaries had caused the death in custody in a manner the law has repeatedly deprecated, and found the Rs 50,000 earlier paid under NHRC orders grossly inadequate but deductible. The State's appeal was dismissed by a Division Bench on 22 May 2004, leaving the award intact.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (R.S. Sodhi, J.) on 17 November 2000 allowed the writ petition of Iqubal Begam and directed the State to pay Rs 3,50,000 as compensation for the custodial death of her 68-year-old husband [name withheld] at Police Station Seelampur on 27/28 August 1994. The court held on the Section 176 CrPC magisterial-inquiry record, DD entries, MLC and post-mortem evidence of seven ante-mortem blunt-force abrasions that the deceased remained in continuous police custody from 7.50 p.m. until declared dead at 00.40 hrs, and that inflicted brutality had precipitated his fatal cardiac condition. It held the State and its functionaries had caused the death in custody in a manner the law has repeatedly deprecated, and found the Rs 50,000 earlier paid under NHRC orders grossly inadequate but deductible. The State's appeal was dismissed by a Division Bench on 22 May 2004, leaving the award intact.", "court_quote": "Therefore, from material on record it is clear that the death of the husband of the petitioner, a Delhi man, can be termed as 'custodial death' and even if the deceased was suffering from heart problem, the brutality inflicted upon him only precipitated the condition which proved fatal.", "court_quote_para": "6", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC held death in Seelampur custody proved, ordered Rs 3.5 lakh compensation; appeal dismissed.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2000-11-17", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 350,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "2001 ACJ 2033", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "officers" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/938973/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/610196/", "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-106" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-38-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2000-0009", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0671", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Government of NCT of Delhi vs Nasiruddin (father of deceased [name withheld]. Tihar Man)", "display_title_redacted": "Government of NCT of Delhi vs Nasiruddin (father of deceased [name withheld]. Tihar Man)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Tihar", "police_station_or_unit": "Tihar Jail", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Government of NCT of Delhi vs Nasiruddin (father of deceased [name withheld]. Tihar Man)", "case_number": null, "citation": "2002 ACJ 1530", "judges": [ "Arijit Pasayat", "D.K. Jain" ], "judgment_date": "2000-11-27", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2000, "incident_date": "1996-07-13", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [], "officer_count": 0, "victims": [ { "age": 21, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Tihar man, age 21" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 200000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/810570/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. A Tihar man, about 21, was picked up by police on 15 April 1996, lodged in Tihar Jail and died there on 13 July 1996 with 15 ante-mortem injuries; a government medical board conceded several injuries could not have been self-inflicted. The State claimed he was a violent psychiatric patient injured while being restrained. The Division Bench rejected that plea, holding doctors examining him over 8-13 July 1996 could not have missed the injuries, and affirmed State liability in public law for the custodial death. It reduced compensation from Rs.2.5 lakh to Rs.2 lakh (Rs.1,25,000 already paid). Erring officials were not individually named. LPA against W.P.(Crl.) No.585/1996 judgment dated 16.12.1997. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "A Tihar man, about 21, was picked up by police on 15 April 1996, lodged in Tihar Jail and died there on 13 July 1996 with 15 ante-mortem injuries; a government medical board conceded several injuries could not have been self-inflicted. The State claimed he was a violent psychiatric patient injured while being restrained. The Division Bench rejected that plea, holding doctors examining him over 8-13 July 1996 could not have missed the injuries, and affirmed State liability in public law for the custodial death. It reduced compensation from Rs.2.5 lakh to Rs.2 lakh (Rs.1,25,000 already paid). Erring officials were not individually named. LPA against W.P.(Crl.) No.585/1996 judgment dated 16.12.1997.", "court_quote": "there can be no doubt in view of background facts highlighted above about the State's liability to pay the compensation.", "court_quote_para": "23", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Custodial-assault death affirmed on LPA; State liability upheld, compensation fixed at Rs.2L.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2000-11-27", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 200,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "2002 ACJ 1530", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/810570/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-50" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP7-006", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2001-0006", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0482", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable and others v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable and others v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable and others v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "case_number": null, "citation": "93 (2001) DLT 563; 2002 (61) DRJ 583", "judges": [ "M. Khan", "Sharda Aggarwal" ], "judgment_date": "2001-08-21", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2001, "incident_date": "1993-01-01", "incident_year": 1993, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 366", "IPC 376", "IPC 506" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "no", "jev_risk": 0.2, "jev_p_culpable": 0.87, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no_row" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "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": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "female", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi woman" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1442362/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ of two Delhi Police constables dismissed from service in July 1993 without enquiry under Article 311(2)(b) on a gang-rape charge (FIR 289/93). After the Trial Magistrate discharged them in 1996 for want of prima facie evidence, they sought reinstatement invoking Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1980. The Court held a pre-trial discharge is not an acquittal and Rule 12 was inapplicable, sustaining the CAT dismissal of their plea. Caveat: the dismissal was upheld purely on this Rule 12 legal point; there is no merits finding on the rape charge itself. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ of two Delhi Police constables dismissed from service in July 1993 without enquiry under Article 311(2)(b) on a gang-rape charge (FIR 289/93). After the Trial Magistrate discharged them in 1996 for want of prima facie evidence, they sought reinstatement invoking Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1980. The Court held a pre-trial discharge is not an acquittal and Rule 12 was inapplicable, sustaining the CAT dismissal of their plea. Caveat: the dismissal was upheld purely on this Rule 12 legal point; there is no merits finding on the rape charge itself.", "court_quote": "We accordingly hold that order of discharge in a criminal case does not amount to an order of acquittal.", "court_quote_para": "8", "confidence": "medium", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC dismissed writ on Rule 12 point (discharge is not acquittal); dismissal stands.", "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": "2001-08-21", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "93 (2001) DLT 563; 2002 (61) DRJ 583", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote_para", "subcategory" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1442362/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-42" ], "merged_case_id": "SWCUSTOD-014", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2001-0016", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0780", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Ex. Constable Jal Singh vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Ex. Constable Jal Singh vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "New Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Ex. Constable Jal Singh vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "case_number": null, "citation": "2002(63) DRJ 198", "judges": [ "Sharda Aggarwal" ], "judgment_date": "2001-09-19", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2001, "incident_date": "1991-05-08", "incident_year": 1991, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Constitution Art.226" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Jal Singh", "rank": "Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.93, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Jal Singh", "display": "Jal Singh (Constable)" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/398507/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/703602/ex-constable-jal-singh-vs-commissioner-police" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Delhi Police constable Jal Singh remained unauthorisedly absent from 8 May 1991 to 26 July 1991 despite two absentee notices, and had 40 prior unauthorised absences on record. A departmental enquiry held the misconduct charge proved and he was dismissed on 17 July 1992; his departmental appeal and OA No.1529/93 before the Central Administrative Tribunal both failed. The court held that regularising the absence as leave without pay was only for maintaining a correct service record and did not obliterate the dismissal, following Harihar Gopal. It found no illegality in the dismissal, dismissed the Article 226 writ petition, and upheld the Tribunal order dated 14 July 1999. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Delhi Police constable Jal Singh remained unauthorisedly absent from 8 May 1991 to 26 July 1991 despite two absentee notices, and had 40 prior unauthorised absences on record. A departmental enquiry held the misconduct charge proved and he was dismissed on 17 July 1992; his departmental appeal and OA No.1529/93 before the Central Administrative Tribunal both failed. The court held that regularising the absence as leave without pay was only for maintaining a correct service record and did not obliterate the dismissal, following Harihar Gopal. It found no illegality in the dismissal, dismissed the Article 226 writ petition, and upheld the Tribunal order dated 14 July 1999.", "court_quote": "we are of the opinion that the order dismissal of the petitioner does not suffer from any illegality", "court_quote_para": "14", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi Police constable's dismissal for habitual unauthorised absence upheld; writ dismissed.", "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": "2001-09-19", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "2002(63) DRJ 198", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/398507/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/703602/ex-constable-jal-singh-vs-commissioner-police", "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-58" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-17-001", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2002-0019", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1168", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs Union of India and Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable vs Union of India and Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "III Bn DAP, Patiala House Courts", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs Union of India and Ors.", "case_number": "CWP No. 7007 of 2001", "citation": null, "judges": [ "S.B. Sinha", "A.K. Sikri" ], "judgment_date": "2002-03-16", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2002, "incident_date": "1996-08-23", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 221", "IPC 222", "IPC 223" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "III Bn DAP, Delhi Police (Patiala House Courts Gaddi Guard)", "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, III Bn DAP, Delhi Police (Patiala House Courts Gaddi Guard)" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "III Bn DAP, Delhi Police (Patiala House Courts Gaddi Guard)", "role": "named_only", "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, III Bn DAP, Delhi Police (Patiala House Courts Gaddi Guard)" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "III Bn DAP, Delhi Police (Patiala House Courts Gaddi Guard)", "role": "named_only", "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": "Head Constable, III Bn DAP, Delhi Police (Patiala House Courts Gaddi Guard)" } ], "officer_count": 3, "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/347357/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/920153/pdf/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (S.B. Sinha, C.J. and A.K. Sikri, J.) on 16 March 2002 dismissed the writ petition against the CAT order in OA No. 2430 of 1998 and left intact the removal of Delhi Armed Police constables and [name withheld] for gross negligence that allowed undertrial prisoner Mohd. Salim to escape from the Patiala House Courts Dakhila gate on 23 August 1996. The court held the escape-specific Rule 29 enquiry governed rather than a Rule 15 preliminary enquiry, that due procedure was followed with six prosecution and five defence witnesses examined, and that the admitted escape at the petitioner's searching/frisking post proved dereliction. It declined to interfere with the quantum of punishment, which had been considered at all levels. The removal from service therefore stood; the supervising Head Constable's increment stop was also left undisturbed. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (S.B. Sinha, C.J. and A.K. Sikri, J.) on 16 March 2002 dismissed the writ petition against the CAT order in OA No. 2430 of 1998 and left intact the removal of Delhi Armed Police constables and [name withheld] for gross negligence that allowed undertrial prisoner Mohd. Salim to escape from the Patiala House Courts Dakhila gate on 23 August 1996. The court held the escape-specific Rule 29 enquiry governed rather than a Rule 15 preliminary enquiry, that due procedure was followed with six prosecution and five defence witnesses examined, and that the admitted escape at the petitioner's searching/frisking post proved dereliction. It declined to interfere with the quantum of punishment, which had been considered at all levels. The removal from service therefore stood; the supervising Head Constable's increment stop was also left undisturbed.", "court_quote": "The fact that the under trial prisoner has escaped from the custody stood admitted and the fact that the petitioner and the other delinquent officers were do duty was also admitted.", "court_quote_para": "26", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC dismissed writ; removal of 2 constables for UTP escape at Patiala House stands.", "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": "2002-03-16", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "CWP No. 7007 of 2001", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "subcategory" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/347357/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/920153/pdf/", "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-106" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-38-006", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2002-0020", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1165", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. vs Delhi Police Constable", "display_title_redacted": "Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. vs Delhi Police Constable", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. vs Delhi Police Constable", "case_number": null, "citation": "100(2002)DLT385", "judges": [ "S.B. Sinha", "A.K. Sikri" ], "judgment_date": "2002-04-11", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2002, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": null, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 354" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "female", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi woman" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/758817/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (S.B. Sinha, C.J. and A.K. Sikri, J.) on 11 April 2002 allowed the Government's writ petition arising from CAT OA No. 1161/1996 and set aside the Tribunal's judgment, leaving intact the dismissal of Delhi Police constable for outraging the modesty of the survivor at her jhuggi and threatening her husband. The court held Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980 bars fresh departmental punishment after a judicial acquittal but does not vitiate a dismissal already imposed on 15 January 1991 before the acquittal, and that a pending appeal does not keep punishment under animated suspension. It further held the criminal acquittal was only on benefit of doubt, falling within the exception in Rule 12(a). The dismissal therefore stood. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (S.B. Sinha, C.J. and A.K. Sikri, J.) on 11 April 2002 allowed the Government's writ petition arising from CAT OA No. 1161/1996 and set aside the Tribunal's judgment, leaving intact the dismissal of Delhi Police constable for outraging the modesty of the survivor at her jhuggi and threatening her husband. The court held Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980 bars fresh departmental punishment after a judicial acquittal but does not vitiate a dismissal already imposed on 15 January 1991 before the acquittal, and that a pending appeal does not keep punishment under animated suspension. It further held the criminal acquittal was only on benefit of doubt, falling within the exception in Rule 12(a). The dismissal therefore stood.", "court_quote": "In the departmental proceedings, the petitioner was found guilty of misconduct and by an order dated 15th January 1991, a penalty of dismissal from service was imposed on him.", "court_quote_para": "2", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC allowed Govt writ, set aside CAT order; dismissal for outraging modesty stands.", "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": "2002-04-11", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "100(2002)DLT385", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/758817/", "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-106" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-38-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2002-0021", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1169", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable (No. 1822/W) vs Union of India and Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable (No. 1822/W) vs Union of India and Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Punjabi Bagh", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable (No. 1822/W) vs Union of India and Ors.", "case_number": "CWP arising from CAT OA No. 1372/1999 (writ number not stated)", "citation": "99(2002)DLT715; 2002(64)DRJ260", "judges": [ "S. B. Sinha", "A. K. Sikri" ], "judgment_date": "2002-04-11", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2002, "incident_date": "1998-03-01", "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": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable (No. 1822/W)", "unit": "PS Punjabi Bagh, West District, Delhi Police", "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 (No. 1822/W), PS Punjabi Bagh, West District, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1933258/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "Constable of PS Punjabi Bagh was dismissed on 14.11.1998 after a departmental enquiry found he consumed liquor on duty at a picket on Road No. 77 on 1.3.1998 and assaulted fellow Constable, causing simple blunt injuries. His departmental appeal and CAT Original Application were dismissed, and he challenged the dismissal under Article 226. The Court held the liquor-taking and assault proved on preponderance of probability on the victim's categorical evidence, the SI's report and both MLCs, rejecting pleas of non-examination of doctors and Rule 15 violation. Finding no case for interference, the Court dismissed the writ petition, leaving the dismissal from service intact. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Constable of PS Punjabi Bagh was dismissed on 14.11.1998 after a departmental enquiry found he consumed liquor on duty at a picket on Road No. 77 on 1.3.1998 and assaulted fellow Constable, causing simple blunt injuries. His departmental appeal and CAT Original Application were dismissed, and he challenged the dismissal under Article 226. The Court held the liquor-taking and assault proved on preponderance of probability on the victim's categorical evidence, the SI's report and both MLCs, rejecting pleas of non-examination of doctors and Rule 15 violation. Finding no case for interference, the Court dismissed the writ petition, leaving the dismissal from service intact.", "court_quote": "Although the doctors had not been examined, the fact that the petitioner had taken liquor and assaulted the said a Delhi man, has been proved.", "court_quote_para": "13", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC dismissed writ; dismissal of drunk-on-duty constable for assault upheld.", "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": "2002-04-11", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "99(2002)DLT715; 2002(64)DRJ260", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1933258/", "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-107" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-38-007", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2002-0024", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1164", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and Anr. vs Union of India and Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and Anr. vs Union of India and Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and Anr. vs Union of India and Ors.", "case_number": null, "citation": "(2011) 182 DLT 350", "judges": [ "S.B. Sinha", "A.K. Sikri" ], "judgment_date": "2002-05-31", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2002, "incident_date": "1993-09-30", "incident_year": 1993, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory_display": "extortion", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 384", "IPC 34" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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": "Head Constable, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable (Driver)", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "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 (Driver), Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 3, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1595395/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (S.B. Sinha, C.J. and A.K. Sikri, J.) on 31 May 2002 dismissed the writ petition against the CAT order in OA No. 2696 of 2000 and left intact the dismissal of Delhi Police personnel for forcibly snatching Rs 40,000 from train passenger a Delhi resident in the wee hours of 30 September 1993. The court held the dismissal of 2 December 1998 had attained finality before the criminal acquittal of 7 December 1999 and could not be reopened on that subsequent event, and that simultaneous departmental and criminal proceedings are not barred. It held the inquiry evidence, including recoveries of Rs 13,000 at the instance of each delinquent and the evidence of PWs 3 and 4, sustained the charges on preponderance of probability. The court found no case for interference under its limited judicial review jurisdiction and dismissed the petition. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (S.B. Sinha, C.J. and A.K. Sikri, J.) on 31 May 2002 dismissed the writ petition against the CAT order in OA No. 2696 of 2000 and left intact the dismissal of Delhi Police personnel for forcibly snatching Rs 40,000 from train passenger a Delhi resident in the wee hours of 30 September 1993. The court held the dismissal of 2 December 1998 had attained finality before the criminal acquittal of 7 December 1999 and could not be reopened on that subsequent event, and that simultaneous departmental and criminal proceedings are not barred. It held the inquiry evidence, including recoveries of Rs 13,000 at the instance of each delinquent and the evidence of PWs 3 and 4, sustained the charges on preponderance of probability. The court found no case for interference under its limited judicial review jurisdiction and dismissed the petition.", "court_quote": "In the instant case, the amount extracted from the complainant had been recovered from each of the three delinquent officials to the extent of rs. 13,000/-. Such recoveries were made at the instance of he delinquent officials themselves.", "court_quote_para": "13", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC dismissed writ, upheld dismissal of policemen for snatching Rs 40,000 despite later acquittal.", "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": "2002-05-31", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2011) 182 DLT 350", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1595395/", "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-106" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-38-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2002-0003", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0538", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector v. State", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector v. State", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Lahori Gate Police Station", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector v. State", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 102 of 1978", "citation": "(2002) 07 DEL CK 0047", "judges": [ "R.S. Sodhi" ], "judgment_date": "2002-07-02", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2002, "incident_date": "1975-08-06", "incident_year": 1975, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory_display": "extortion", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 161", "IPC 342", "IPC 384", "PC Act 1947 s.5(2)", "PC Act 1947 s.5(1)(d)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "unit": "P.S. Lahori Gate, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_gpt56:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "unclear", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.15, "jev_p_culpable": 0.95, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, P.S. Lahori Gate, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 3, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1954751/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/385328/manphool-singh-appellant-hash-state-respondent/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Assistant Sub-Inspector (pursued by his legal representative after his death), upholding his conviction by the Special Judge in Corruption Case No. 55/76. On the night of 6/7 August 1975, the ASI with four constables picked up three residents of Haider Kuli on the false pretext of arrest under the Defence of India Rules, confined them at Lahori Gate Police Station and demanded Rs 6,000 for their release, collecting Rs 800. The High Court found no infirmity in the trial court's appreciation of evidence and held the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The sentence of two years' rigorous imprisonment each under Sections 161 and 384 IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, one year under Section 342 IPC, and fines of Rs 500 stood affirmed. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Assistant Sub-Inspector (pursued by his legal representative after his death), upholding his conviction by the Special Judge in Corruption Case No. 55/76. On the night of 6/7 August 1975, the ASI with four constables picked up three residents of Haider Kuli on the false pretext of arrest under the Defence of India Rules, confined them at Lahori Gate Police Station and demanded Rs 6,000 for their release, collecting Rs 800. The High Court found no infirmity in the trial court's appreciation of evidence and held the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The sentence of two years' rigorous imprisonment each under Sections 161 and 384 IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, one year under Section 342 IPC, and fines of Rs 500 stood affirmed.", "court_quote": "I find that there is no material contradiction which can lead to the conclusion that PW-7, PW-8 and PW-13 are not trustworthy witnesses. If the statement of these witnesses is believed, I find that the prosecution has been able to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond a shadow of doubt.", "court_quote_para": "8", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC (R.S. Sodhi J.) dismissed Criminal Appeal 102/1978, upholding ASI 's conviction and 2-year RI for extortion, bribery and wrongful confinement.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2002) 07 DEL CK 0047", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2002-07-02", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2002) 07 DEL CK 0047", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1954751/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/385328/manphool-singh-appellant-hash-state-respondent/", "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-16", "chunk-r09" ], "merged_case_id": "SWEXTORT-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2002-0026", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1163", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PCR Van DL-1A-0407 (Z-28)", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.", "case_number": "CWP Nos. 2537 and 2546 of 2001", "citation": "(2002) 07 DEL CK 0066", "judges": [ "S.B. Sinha", "A.K. Sikri" ], "judgment_date": "2002-07-31", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2002, "incident_date": "1996-12-29", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory_display": "extortion", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police Act 1978 s.21" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "PCR Van DL-1A-0407 (Z-28), Delhi Police", "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": "Head Constable, PCR Van DL-1A-0407 (Z-28), Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "PCR Van DL-1A-0407 (Z-28), Delhi Police", "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": "Head Constable, PCR Van DL-1A-0407 (Z-28), Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "PCR Van DL-1A-0407 (Z-28), Delhi Police", "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, PCR Van DL-1A-0407 (Z-28), Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 3, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "New Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1038914/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (S.B. Sinha, C.J. and A.K. Sikri, J.) on 31 July 2002 dismissed the writ petitions of three Delhi Police PCR personnel and left intact their dismissal from service for extorting 35 pounds from a British-passport holder near IGI Airport on the night of 29/30 December 1996. The court held departmental proceedings require only preponderance of probability, not criminal-trial proof, and that the unavailable complainant's statement could be taken on record under Rule 16(iii) of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeals) Rules, 1980. It held the petitioners' undisputed presence on PCR duty at the site corroborated the extortion charge and found no illegality in the Tribunal's order. The dismissals ordered on 2 December 1998, affirmed on appeal and by the CAT, therefore stood.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (S.B. Sinha, C.J. and A.K. Sikri, J.) on 31 July 2002 dismissed the writ petitions of three Delhi Police PCR personnel and left intact their dismissal from service for extorting 35 pounds from a British-passport holder near IGI Airport on the night of 29/30 December 1996. The court held departmental proceedings require only preponderance of probability, not criminal-trial proof, and that the unavailable complainant's statement could be taken on record under Rule 16(iii) of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeals) Rules, 1980. It held the petitioners' undisputed presence on PCR duty at the site corroborated the extortion charge and found no illegality in the Tribunal's order. The dismissals ordered on 2 December 1998, affirmed on appeal and by the CAT, therefore stood.", "court_quote": "In the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any merit in these writ petitions, which are accordingly dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "33", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC dismissed writs, upheld dismissal of 3 PCR policemen for extorting £35 from tourist.", "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": "2002-07-31", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2002) 07 DEL CK 0066", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1038914/", "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-106" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-38-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2002-0028", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1167", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs Union of India and Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable vs Union of India and Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "E Block, Security Lines", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs Union of India and Ors.", "case_number": "CWP No. 4775 of 2002", "citation": "[2003(96)FLR621]", "judges": [ "Anil Dev Singh", "Mukul Mudgal" ], "judgment_date": "2002-08-19", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2002, "incident_date": "1993-01-01", "incident_year": 1993, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 420" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "E Block, Security Lines, Delhi Police", "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, E Block, Security Lines, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "New Delhi resident" }, { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "New Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 2, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/804850/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/703941/ex-constable-vinod-kumar-vs-secretary-ministry" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court on 19 August 2002 dismissed the writ petition of ex-constable [name withheld] against the CAT order in OA No. 995/2002 and left intact his dismissal from Delhi Police for taking illegal gratification in 1993-1994: Rs 20,000 and Rs 5,000 for securing an MCD teacher appointment for [name withheld], and Rs 20,000 from a New Delhi resident for getting his son appointed a constable. The court held the disciplinary and appellate authorities' view could not be faulted and that a policeman indulging in lawlessness shakes public faith in government machinery. It held the later criminal acquittal in FIR No. 99/96 (Section 420 IPC, PS Tilak Marg) was on compromise, not merits, so it did not entitle him to reversal of the departmental punishment, and Rule 12 was inapplicable where punishment preceded the acquittal. The dismissal ordered on 20 May 1999 therefore stood. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court on 19 August 2002 dismissed the writ petition of ex-constable [name withheld] against the CAT order in OA No. 995/2002 and left intact his dismissal from Delhi Police for taking illegal gratification in 1993-1994: Rs 20,000 and Rs 5,000 for securing an MCD teacher appointment for [name withheld], and Rs 20,000 from a New Delhi resident for getting his son appointed a constable. The court held the disciplinary and appellate authorities' view could not be faulted and that a policeman indulging in lawlessness shakes public faith in government machinery. It held the later criminal acquittal in FIR No. 99/96 (Section 420 IPC, PS Tilak Marg) was on compromise, not merits, so it did not entitle him to reversal of the departmental punishment, and Rule 12 was inapplicable where punishment preceded the acquittal. The dismissal ordered on 20 May 1999 therefore stood.", "court_quote": "After recording the evidence the Enquiry Officer held the charges to be proved against the petitioner. Thereafter, on May 20, 1999, the Disciplinary Authority passed an order dismissing the petitioner from service.", "court_quote_para": "2", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC dismissed writ; dismissal for taking job-related bribes stands despite compromise acquittal.", "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": "2002-08-19", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "[2003(96)FLR621]", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/804850/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/703941/ex-constable-vinod-kumar-vs-secretary-ministry", "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-106" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-38-005", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2002-0005", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0109", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Rajouri Garden Man vs Union of India and Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Rajouri Garden Man vs Union of India and Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Rajouri Garden", "police_station_or_unit": "P.S. Rajouri Garden", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Rajouri Garden Man vs Union of India and Ors.", "case_number": null, "citation": "AIR 2003 Delhi 50; 100 (2002) DLT 721", "judges": [ "S.B. Sinha", "A.K. Sikri" ], "judgment_date": "2002-09-30", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2002, "incident_date": "1992-12-10", "incident_year": 1992, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "MV Act 1988 s.185", "Constitution Art 21", "Constitution Art 226" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "P.S. Rajouri Garden", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "no", "jev_risk": 0.93, "jev_p_culpable": 0.03, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, P.S. Rajouri Garden" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "P.S. Rajouri Garden", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no", "redteam:escort_no_finding_plus_name_collision" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.92, "jev_p_culpable": 0.04, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, P.S. Rajouri Garden" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Rajouri Garden man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 200000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1930290/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court held that the Delhi Police violated a Rajouri Garden man's fundamental right to life under Article 21, awarding his widow [name withheld] 2 lakh in public-law damages. Sharma, arrested under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act after a scooter accident on 10 December 1992 left him with a bleeding head wound, was kept in the Rajouri Garden lock-up overnight; when he complained of severe headache at 12:30 AM he was shown to the same doctor but neither hospitalised nor treated further, and he died that afternoon after being bailed out in the morning. The Court held the police failed in their statutory duty of care toward an injured arrestee who ought to have been hospitalised or released, and left the widow free to claim further damages by civil suit. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court held that the Delhi Police violated a Rajouri Garden man's fundamental right to life under Article 21, awarding his widow [name withheld] 2 lakh in public-law damages. Sharma, arrested under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act after a scooter accident on 10 December 1992 left him with a bleeding head wound, was kept in the Rajouri Garden lock-up overnight; when he complained of severe headache at 12:30 AM he was shown to the same doctor but neither hospitalised nor treated further, and he died that afternoon after being bailed out in the morning. The Court held the police failed in their statutory duty of care toward an injured arrestee who ought to have been hospitalised or released, and left the widow free to claim further damages by civil suit.", "court_quote": "Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that it is a fit case where the petitioner has been able to establish that there has been a violation of the deceased's Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, thus, damages in public law remedy can be awarded. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that the respondent should pay a sum of Rs. 2 lacs to the petitioner herein with the liberty to her to file an appropriate suit for damages, if she is so advised.", "court_quote_para": "35", "confidence": "medium", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; Art.21 violation + public-law damages for custodial death (operative figure per reported citation).", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2002-09-30", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 200,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "AIR 2003 Delhi 50; 100 (2002) DLT 721", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1930290/", "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-28" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-018", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2003-0013", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0108", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "New Delhi Woman vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "New Delhi Woman vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi (Paharganj)", "police_station_or_unit": "Delhi Police (Paharganj)", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "New Delhi Woman vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi", "case_number": null, "citation": "108 (2003) DLT 718; 2004 (72) DRJ 644", "judges": [ "Vikramajit Sen" ], "judgment_date": "2003-12-19", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2003, "incident_date": "2000-04-07", "incident_year": 2000, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Police (Paharganj)", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.38, "jev_p_culpable": 0.76, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Delhi Police (Paharganj)" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Police (Paharganj)", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.31, "jev_p_culpable": 0.79, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Delhi Police (Paharganj)" } ], "officer_count": 4, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 500000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1570002/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Vikramajit Sen, J.) awarded Rs 5,00,000 for the custodial death of three-wheeler driver [name withheld], arrested in a traffic challan case on 7 April 2000 and dead the next afternoon, holding blatant and blameworthy non-compliance with the D.K. Basu imperatives for which each respondent was jointly and severally answerable. Though the inquest found no manhandling and death by cardiac failure, the Court held the failure to inform his wife — despite her rounds of the police station, police post and PCR — blameworthy, since informing the family could have flagged his bypass-surgery history and secured surety for bail. Rs 4,00,000 was to be paid by the State (respondents 1-2) and Rs 25,000 each by respondents 3 to 6, with Rs 10,000 in costs. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Vikramajit Sen, J.) awarded Rs 5,00,000 for the custodial death of three-wheeler driver [name withheld], arrested in a traffic challan case on 7 April 2000 and dead the next afternoon, holding blatant and blameworthy non-compliance with the D.K. Basu imperatives for which each respondent was jointly and severally answerable. Though the inquest found no manhandling and death by cardiac failure, the Court held the failure to inform his wife — despite her rounds of the police station, police post and PCR — blameworthy, since informing the family could have flagged his bypass-surgery history and secured surety for bail. Rs 4,00,000 was to be paid by the State (respondents 1-2) and Rs 25,000 each by respondents 3 to 6, with Rs 10,000 in costs. The police version is not recorded in the cited text.", "court_quote": "I am satisfied that there has been blatant and blameworthy non-compliance with the imperatives enunciated in D.K. Basu's case, for which each of the Respondents is jointly as well as severally answerable and liable.", "court_quote_para": "10", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "D.K. Basu violations caused custodial death; Rs 5L + costs verified.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2003-12-19", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 500,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "108 (2003) DLT 718; 2004 (72) DRJ 644", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote_para", "officers", "summary" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1570002/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-27" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-017", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2004-0001", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0104", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) vs Smt. Iqbal Begum", "display_title_redacted": "State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) vs Smt. Iqbal Begum", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Seelampur", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Seelampur, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) vs Smt. Iqbal Begum", "case_number": "Letters Patent Appeal against Single Judge writ judgment (2004 CriLJ 3092)", "citation": "2004 CriLJ 3092", "judges": [ "Dalveer Bhandari", "R.C. Jain" ], "judgment_date": "2004-05-22", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2004, "incident_date": "1994-08-27", "incident_year": 1994, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Seelampur man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 350000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/610196/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/378848/state-govt-of-nct-of-delhi-vs-smt-iqbal-begum/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (Dalveer Bhandari, J.) dismissed the State's appeal as devoid of merit and upheld Rs. 3,50,000 ex-gratia compensation for the custodial death of a Seelampur man Summoned to PS Seelampur at 5 PM on 27 August 1994 and locked up at 7:50 PM, he died during interrogation the same night with multiple ante-mortem injuries and was brought dead to hospital at 00:40 AM; a Section 176 CrPC magisterial inquiry confirmed death in police custody. The Court recorded that the State and its functionaries caused the death in custody, holding the brutality precipitated his fatal condition despite a heart ailment, and rebuked the State for appealing a just and reasonable award instead of graciously accepting it.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court Division Bench (Dalveer Bhandari, J.) dismissed the State's appeal as devoid of merit and upheld Rs. 3,50,000 ex-gratia compensation for the custodial death of a Seelampur man Summoned to PS Seelampur at 5 PM on 27 August 1994 and locked up at 7:50 PM, he died during interrogation the same night with multiple ante-mortem injuries and was brought dead to hospital at 00:40 AM; a Section 176 CrPC magisterial inquiry confirmed death in police custody. The Court recorded that the State and its functionaries caused the death in custody, holding the brutality precipitated his fatal condition despite a heart ailment, and rebuked the State for appealing a just and reasonable award instead of graciously accepting it.", "court_quote": "From the entire material on record it is clear that the death of the husband of the respondent can be clearly termed as custodial death and even if the deceased was suffering from the heart problem, the brutality inflicted upon him only precipitated the condition which proved fatal.", "court_quote_para": "7", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Primary judgment verified: State appeal dismissed; Rs 3.5 lakh custodial-death compensation upheld.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2004-05-22", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 350,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "2004 CriLJ 3092", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/610196/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/378848/state-govt-of-nct-of-delhi-vs-smt-iqbal-begum/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-15", "chunk-r09" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-013", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2005-0012", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1173", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable (Executive) and others vs NCT of Delhi and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable (Executive) and others vs NCT of Delhi and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable (Executive) and others vs NCT of Delhi and Others", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No. 3494 of 2005", "citation": "(2005) 05 DEL CK 0262", "judges": [ "Mukundakam Sharma", "Rekha Sharma" ], "judgment_date": "2005-05-17", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2005, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": null, "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 (Executive)", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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 (Executive), Delhi Police" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/261809/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/921255/ex-constable-vikas-kumar-no-1351w-appellant-hash-nct-of-delhi-and-others-respondent/" ], "summary": "Constable (Executive) [name withheld] was dismissed on 10.11.2001 after departmental proceedings found he had secured enrolment in the Delhi Police with forged high-school and intermediate certificates showing date of birth 02.01.1971, though Board records and his genuine character certificate showed 01.04.1969, and had withdrawn the originals from his character roll in 1995 on a false pretext. His departmental appeal and CAT Original Application were dismissed. The Court held the forgery proved by Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad documentary evidence, rejected procedural challenges on non-supply of documents and non-examination of witnesses, and found no infirmity in the Tribunal order. The writ petition was dismissed and the dismissal from service stands. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Constable (Executive) [name withheld] was dismissed on 10.11.2001 after departmental proceedings found he had secured enrolment in the Delhi Police with forged high-school and intermediate certificates showing date of birth 02.01.1971, though Board records and his genuine character certificate showed 01.04.1969, and had withdrawn the originals from his character roll in 1995 on a false pretext. His departmental appeal and CAT Original Application were dismissed. The Court held the forgery proved by Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad documentary evidence, rejected procedural challenges on non-supply of documents and non-examination of witnesses, and found no infirmity in the Tribunal order. The writ petition was dismissed and the dismissal from service stands.", "court_quote": "We find no infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly the petition is dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "8", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Writ dismissed; dismissal for forged enrolment certificates and false DOB upheld.", "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": "2005-05-17", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2005) 05 DEL CK 0262", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/261809/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/921255/ex-constable-vikas-kumar-no-1351w-appellant-hash-nct-of-delhi-and-others-respondent/", "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-107" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-39-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2005-0014", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0788", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Surender Kumar vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Surender Kumar vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Surender Kumar vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "case_number": "CW No. 10451 of 2004", "citation": "(2005) 123 DLT 185 : (2005) 83 DRJ 703", "judges": [ "Mukundakam Sharma", "Sanjiv Khanna" ], "judgment_date": "2005-07-25", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2005, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": null, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police Act 1978 s.23", "Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980 r.24" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Surender Kumar", "rank": "Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Police (Central District)", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Surender Kumar", "display": "Surender Kumar (Constable)" } ], "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/914874/surender-kumar-vs-commissioner-of-police-and-others/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/678626/", "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/702126/surender-kumar-vs-commissioner-police-ors" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police constable Surender Kumar and upheld his removal from service for habitual unauthorised absence, holding it proved that he absented himself on five occasions between June 1997 and June 1999 totalling 137 days, on top of 34 earlier absences that had drawn warnings and censure. The Court rejected his illness plea, noting he produced no medical certificates for four of the five spells and did not respond to directions to report for medical examination. It held judicial review of the quantum of punishment is extremely limited, that removal was not ex-facie disproportionate, and described him as a habitual absentee of incorrigible type in a disciplined force. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police constable Surender Kumar and upheld his removal from service for habitual unauthorised absence, holding it proved that he absented himself on five occasions between June 1997 and June 1999 totalling 137 days, on top of 34 earlier absences that had drawn warnings and censure. The Court rejected his illness plea, noting he produced no medical certificates for four of the five spells and did not respond to directions to report for medical examination. It held judicial review of the quantum of punishment is extremely limited, that removal was not ex-facie disproportionate, and described him as a habitual absentee of incorrigible type in a disciplined force.", "court_quote": "It is quite clear that the petitioner is a habitual absentee of incorrigible type.", "court_quote_para": "13", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC upheld removal of constable for 137 days' absence over five spells; internal-discipline matter.", "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": "2005-07-25", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2005) 123 DLT 185 : (2005) 83 DRJ 703", "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/914874/surender-kumar-vs-commissioner-of-police-and-others/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/678626/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/702126/surender-kumar-vs-commissioner-police-ors", "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-59" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-18-005", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2005-0018", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1171", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Man vs State and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Man vs State and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Bara Hindu Rao", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Man vs State and Others", "case_number": "W.P.(Crl.) No. 305 of 2005", "citation": "(2005) 09 DEL CK 0108", "judges": [ "R. S. Sodhi" ], "judgment_date": "2005-09-28", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2005, "incident_date": "2004-10-03", "incident_year": 2004, "category": "Custodial torture", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_torture", "subcategory": "custodial_torture", "subcategory_display": "custodial torture", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "IPC 506", "IPC 34", "CrPC 107", "CrPC 151" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "named_only", "unit": "PS Bara Hindu Rao, Delhi Police", "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": "Sub-Inspector, PS Bara Hindu Rao, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 50000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1277521/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/910447/akhtar-parvez-vs-state-and-others/" ], "summary": "A Delhi man alleged he was picked up on 3.10.2004 by two PS Bara Hindu Rao officials and mercilessly beaten and tortured in custody, despite an earlier High Court protection order against police harassment. The status report showed he was arrested by SI under Sections 107/151 CrPC without sufficient reasons, was not medically examined on lock-up entry, and the Body Inspection Memo showed no injury while the hospital MLC recorded beating in police custody with bruises, contusion and swelling. The Court held a prima facie case of police brutality and custodial torture was made out. It directed registration of an FIR to be investigated by the District Investigating Unit (North) and Rs 50,000 ex gratia ad interim compensation recoverable from the delinquent policeman, expressly without prejudice to the merits. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "A Delhi man alleged he was picked up on 3.10.2004 by two PS Bara Hindu Rao officials and mercilessly beaten and tortured in custody, despite an earlier High Court protection order against police harassment. The status report showed he was arrested by SI under Sections 107/151 CrPC without sufficient reasons, was not medically examined on lock-up entry, and the Body Inspection Memo showed no injury while the hospital MLC recorded beating in police custody with bruises, contusion and swelling. The Court held a prima facie case of police brutality and custodial torture was made out. It directed registration of an FIR to be investigated by the District Investigating Unit (North) and Rs 50,000 ex gratia ad interim compensation recoverable from the delinquent policeman, expressly without prejudice to the merits.", "court_quote": "In that view of the matter, I direct that an FIR be registered and investigation be carried out by the District Investigating Unit (North) and since, prima facie, a case of police brutality and custodial torture is made out, I direct the State to pay by way of an ex gratia ad interim compensation amount of Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) which may be recovered from the delinquent policeman.", "court_quote_para": "11", "confidence": "medium", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Prima facie custodial torture; HC ordered FIR, DIU probe and Rs 50,000 interim compensation.", "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": "Custodial torture", "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": "2005-09-28", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 50,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "(2005) 09 DEL CK 0108", "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": [ "officers" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1277521/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/910447/akhtar-parvez-vs-state-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-107" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-39-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2005-0019", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1170", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Man and Others vs Union of India (UOI) and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Man and Others vs Union of India (UOI) and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Man and Others vs Union of India (UOI) and Others", "case_number": "W.P.(Crl.) Nos. 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968 and 1969 of 2005", "citation": "(2006) 126 DLT 653; (2006) 142 PLR 70", "judges": [ "Ramesh Chand Jain" ], "judgment_date": "2005-12-20", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2005, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": null, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "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": "Head Constable, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "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, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "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, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "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, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 5, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": 32, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man, age 32" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 350000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/425502/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/907952/rekha-and-others-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-others/", "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1560757/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. A Delhi man, aged about 32, who ran an STD booth in Delhi, died of injuries caused by five named Delhi Police officials while in their custody; the respondent State did not dispute the custodial death and stated the officials were facing trial before the Additional Sessions Judge. His widow, two minor daughters and two brothers moved the High Court under Article 226 after the Supreme Court dismissed their petition with liberty to approach it. Applying Nilabati Behera and successor decisions, the Court held the State vicariously liable in public law to compensate the legal heirs. It awarded Rs 3,50,000 to the widow and two minor children (Rs 50,000 to the widow, Rs 3 lakh in FDRs for the children), leaving the State at liberty to recover the amount from the delinquent officials. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "A Delhi man, aged about 32, who ran an STD booth in Delhi, died of injuries caused by five named Delhi Police officials while in their custody; the respondent State did not dispute the custodial death and stated the officials were facing trial before the Additional Sessions Judge. His widow, two minor daughters and two brothers moved the High Court under Article 226 after the Supreme Court dismissed their petition with liberty to approach it. Applying Nilabati Behera and successor decisions, the Court held the State vicariously liable in public law to compensate the legal heirs. It awarded Rs 3,50,000 to the widow and two minor children (Rs 50,000 to the widow, Rs 3 lakh in FDRs for the children), leaving the State at liberty to recover the amount from the delinquent officials.", "court_quote": "there is no denial of the legal position that the state under public law is vicariously liable to compensate the legal heirs of the deceased who has met the custodial death at the hands of official of the State", "court_quote_para": "2", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Admitted custodial death; HC awarded Rs 3.5 lakh compensation, State free to recover from officers.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2005-12-20", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 350,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "(2006) 126 DLT 653; (2006) 142 PLR 70", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/425502/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/907952/rekha-and-others-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-others/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1560757/", "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-107" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-39-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2006-0021", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0789", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Om Pal Singh vs Union of India & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Om Pal Singh vs Union of India & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Om Pal Singh vs Union of India & Ors.", "case_number": "Writ petition (OA 2098/2001 lineage); 2007(1) SLJ 502 (Delhi)", "citation": "2007(1) SLJ 502 (Delhi); LAWS(DLH)-2006-3-214", "judges": [ "Mukundakam Sharma", "Sanjiv Khanna" ], "judgment_date": "2006-03-07", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2006, "incident_date": "1999-02-10", "incident_year": 1999, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980 r.16" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Om Pal Singh", "rank": "Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Om Pal Singh", "display": "Om Pal Singh (Constable)" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/308440/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.the-laws.com/encyclopedia/browse/Case?caseId=106002994000&title=om-pal-singh-vs-unionof-india" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police constable Om Pal Singh and sustained his removal from service for wilfully absenting himself from duty from 10 February 1999 without leave application or medical papers, ignoring absentee notices and a direction to undergo medical examination, against a background of 13 earlier absences for which he had been reprimanded. The Court held the ex-parte enquiry complied with Rule 16 of the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, rejected the departmental-bias challenge, and upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 16. It found no merit in the challenge to the removal penalty or the Central Administrative Tribunal's dismissal of OA 2098/2001. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police constable Om Pal Singh and sustained his removal from service for wilfully absenting himself from duty from 10 February 1999 without leave application or medical papers, ignoring absentee notices and a direction to undergo medical examination, against a background of 13 earlier absences for which he had been reprimanded. The Court held the ex-parte enquiry complied with Rule 16 of the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, rejected the departmental-bias challenge, and upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 16. It found no merit in the challenge to the removal penalty or the Central Administrative Tribunal's dismissal of OA 2098/2001.", "court_quote": "He did not cross-examine the witnesses, file any written statement or give his defense against allegations made against him. There is no allegation that procedure as prescribed in Rule 16 has not been followed.", "court_quote_para": "36", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC upheld removal of constable for wilful absence from Feb 1999; internal-discipline matter.", "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": "2006-03-07", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "2007(1) SLJ 502 (Delhi); LAWS(DLH)-2006-3-214", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/308440/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.the-laws.com/encyclopedia/browse/Case?caseId=106002994000&title=om-pal-singh-vs-unionof-india", "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-59" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-18-006", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2006-0023", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0909", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Commissioner of Police, New Delhi vs Delhi Armed Police Constable", "display_title_redacted": "Commissioner of Police, New Delhi vs Delhi Armed Police Constable", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Vijay Ghat Armoury, Delhi Armed Police", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Commissioner of Police, New Delhi vs Delhi Armed Police Constable", "case_number": "Civil Appeal No. 7488 of 2004", "citation": "(2006) 4 SCC 265", "judges": [ "S. B. Sinha", "P. P. Naolekar" ], "judgment_date": "2006-04-05", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2006, "incident_date": "1997-06-22", "incident_year": 1997, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Constitution Art. 311(2)(b)", "Evidence Act s.25", "Evidence Act s.26", "CrPC s.162", "Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1987 r.12" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Armed Police, Delhi Police", "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, Delhi Armed Police, Delhi Police" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1353031/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/658935/commissioner-police-new-delhi-vs-narender-singh/", "https://bnblegal.com/landmark/commissioner-police-new-delhi-v-narender-singh/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. [name withheld], a Delhi Armed Police constable enrolled in 1994, was implicated by co-accused confessions and his own custodial confession in the theft of two revolvers and a pistol from the Vijay Ghat Armoury while on sentry duty on the night of 22-23 June 1997; he was discharged in the criminal case for want of evidence beyond confessions. The Deputy Commissioner of Police dismissed him without enquiry under the Article 311(2)(b) proviso, but the CAT and the Delhi High Court set the dismissal aside. The Supreme Court held that criminal discharge does not bar departmental action and that Evidence Act Sections 25-26 do not apply to disciplinary proceedings, set aside the Tribunal and High Court judgments, and restored the dismissal. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "[name withheld], a Delhi Armed Police constable enrolled in 1994, was implicated by co-accused confessions and his own custodial confession in the theft of two revolvers and a pistol from the Vijay Ghat Armoury while on sentry duty on the night of 22-23 June 1997; he was discharged in the criminal case for want of evidence beyond confessions. The Deputy Commissioner of Police dismissed him without enquiry under the Article 311(2)(b) proviso, but the CAT and the Delhi High Court set the dismissal aside. The Supreme Court held that criminal discharge does not bar departmental action and that Evidence Act Sections 25-26 do not apply to disciplinary proceedings, set aside the Tribunal and High Court judgments, and restored the dismissal.", "court_quote": "The fact that the respondent as an accused in the aforementioned case made a confession and had pointed out the place wherefrom he allegedly had stolen two revolvers and one pistol, has, thus, not been disputed.", "court_quote_para": "19", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; dismissal of DAP constable for armoury theft restored.", "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": "2006-04-05", "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": "(2006) 4 SCC 265", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1353031/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/658935/commissioner-police-new-delhi-vs-narender-singh/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://bnblegal.com/landmark/commissioner-police-new-delhi-v-narender-singh/", "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-76" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-58-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2006-0029", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1174", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Inspector vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Inspector vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Inspector vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No. 3312 of 2006", "citation": "LAWS(DLH)-2006-11-33", "judges": [ "Manmohan Sarin", "Vipin Sanghi" ], "judgment_date": "2006-11-15", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2006, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": null, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1980 r.8(d)(ii)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Inspector", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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": "Inspector, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "role": "named_only", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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": "Head Constable, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "role": "named_only", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 3, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": null, "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/457839/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/902156/ram-janam-singh-vs-govt-of-nct-of-delhi-and-others/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Inspector faced departmental proceedings on the charge that two constables under him, acting on his sister-in-law's complaint, dispossessed shopkeeper [name withheld] of his shop by removing his goods and putting her lock on it, without any DD entry or registered case. The enquiry held the misconduct proved and the disciplinary authority on 21.3.2000 imposed forfeiture of two years approved service with pay reduction (the same order also punished Head Constable and Constable [name withheld]); his appeal, OA and restoration pleas all failed. The Court held the petitioner could not disown his subordinates' acts and sustained the misconduct finding and forfeiture. It struck only the direction postponing future increments as contrary to Rule 8(d)(ii) of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980, and otherwise dismissed the writ.", "summary_verified": "Inspector faced departmental proceedings on the charge that two constables under him, acting on his sister-in-law's complaint, dispossessed shopkeeper [name withheld] of his shop by removing his goods and putting her lock on it, without any DD entry or registered case. The enquiry held the misconduct proved and the disciplinary authority on 21.3.2000 imposed forfeiture of two years approved service with pay reduction (the same order also punished Head Constable and Constable [name withheld]); his appeal, OA and restoration pleas all failed. The Court held the petitioner could not disown his subordinates' acts and sustained the misconduct finding and forfeiture. It struck only the direction postponing future increments as contrary to Rule 8(d)(ii) of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980, and otherwise dismissed the writ.", "court_quote": "we are unable to agree with the petitioner that there was no misconduct committed by the petitioner and he could not be held liable for the acts of his subordinates.", "court_quote_para": "6", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Misconduct finding sustained; forfeiture of 2 yrs approved service upheld, increment bar struck.", "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": "2006-11-15", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "LAWS(DLH)-2006-11-33", "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": [ "sections" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/457839/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/902156/ram-janam-singh-vs-govt-of-nct-of-delhi-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-107" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-39-005", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2007-0026", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0786", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Parveen Kumar vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Parveen Kumar vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Parveen Kumar vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No. 2295 of 2007", "citation": "(2007) 98 DRJ 433 : (2008) 1 ILR Delhi 168", "judges": [ "Manmohan Sarin", "S.L. Bhayana" ], "judgment_date": "2007-07-13", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2007, "incident_date": "2003-09-05", "incident_year": 2003, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Constitution Art.311(2)(b)", "IPC 395" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Parveen Kumar", "rank": "Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.95, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Parveen Kumar", "display": "Parveen Kumar (Constable)" } ], "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/905682/parveen-kumar-appellant-hash-commissioner-of-police-and-others-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.the-laws.com/encyclopedia/browse/case?caseId=107002341100&title=parveen-kumar-vs-commissioner-of-police", "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/713870/parveen-kumar-vs-commissioner-police-ors" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police constable Parveen Kumar and upheld his dismissal from service under Article 311(2)(b) for grave criminal misconduct, including complicity with gangster Vikrant @ Vicky in dacoity and robbery and involvement in numerous robbery, dacoity, murder and attempt-to-murder cases across Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. The Court held the decision to dispense with the departmental enquiry was based on material record and not conjecture, since as a desperate and dangerous person with criminal associates, witnesses would not muster courage to depose against him for fear of reprisal. It found no infirmity in the disciplinary authority's dismissal order dated 20 September 2003 or the Tribunal's orders and dismissed the petition as devoid of merit. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police constable Parveen Kumar and upheld his dismissal from service under Article 311(2)(b) for grave criminal misconduct, including complicity with gangster Vikrant @ Vicky in dacoity and robbery and involvement in numerous robbery, dacoity, murder and attempt-to-murder cases across Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. The Court held the decision to dispense with the departmental enquiry was based on material record and not conjecture, since as a desperate and dangerous person with criminal associates, witnesses would not muster courage to depose against him for fear of reprisal. It found no infirmity in the disciplinary authority's dismissal order dated 20 September 2003 or the Tribunal's orders and dismissed the petition as devoid of merit.", "court_quote": "If the law keeper becomes lawbreaker, quick and expedient action ought to be taken, to maintain transparency, accountability and above all to maintain public trust and faith in the Police.", "court_quote_para": "19", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC upheld Art.311(2)(b) dismissal of constable involved in dacoity/robbery/murder cases with a gangster.", "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": "2007-07-13", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2007) 98 DRJ 433 : (2008) 1 ILR Delhi 168", "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/905682/parveen-kumar-appellant-hash-commissioner-of-police-and-others-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.the-laws.com/encyclopedia/browse/case?caseId=107002341100&title=parveen-kumar-vs-commissioner-of-police", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/713870/parveen-kumar-vs-commissioner-police-ors", "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-59" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-18-003", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2008-0018", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1172", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "State vs Delhi Police SHO (later Assistant Commissioner of Police) and others", "display_title_redacted": "State vs Delhi Police SHO (later Assistant Commissioner of Police) and others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Vivek Vihar", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "State vs Delhi Police SHO (later Assistant Commissioner of Police) and others", "case_number": "Death Sentence Reference with connected Criminal Appeal (numbers unverified)", "citation": "153 (2008) DLT 693", "judges": [], "judgment_date": "2008-03-05", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2008, "incident_date": "1987-08-24", "incident_year": 1987, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_by_hc", "sections": [ "IPC 304 Part II" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "SHO (later Assistant Commissioner of Police)", "unit": "PS Vivek Vihar, Delhi Police", "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": "SHO (later Assistant Commissioner of Police), PS Vivek Vihar, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 8, "compensation_inr": 200000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/387672/pdf/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/663097/rp-tyagi-vs-state-govt-of-nct-of-delhi/", "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1316909/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. After Constable of PS Vivek Vihar was stabbed on 16.8.1987, police detained family members and neighbours, and on 24.8.1987 a Delhi man and [name withheld] were brought to the station where SHO and others at his instance severely beat them; a Delhi man died the next day at LNJP Hospital and an SDM inquest indicted the officers. The trial court (SC No. 01/2006, ASJ Karkardooma, December 2006) convicted [name withheld] under Sections 302/342/120-B IPC and sentenced him to death. The High Court declined the death reference, holding murderous intent not proved but sustaining culpability for the homicidal custodial death, and convicted him under Section 304 Part II IPC with 8 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs 2,00,000 fine payable to the deceased's mother [name withheld]. The Supreme Court dismissed his appeal on 12.11.2009 (Crl.A. Nos. 1440-1441/2008). Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "After Constable of PS Vivek Vihar was stabbed on 16.8.1987, police detained family members and neighbours, and on 24.8.1987 a Delhi man and [name withheld] were brought to the station where SHO and others at his instance severely beat them; a Delhi man died the next day at LNJP Hospital and an SDM inquest indicted the officers. The trial court (SC No. 01/2006, ASJ Karkardooma, December 2006) convicted [name withheld] under Sections 302/342/120-B IPC and sentenced him to death. The High Court declined the death reference, holding murderous intent not proved but sustaining culpability for the homicidal custodial death, and convicted him under Section 304 Part II IPC with 8 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs 2,00,000 fine payable to the deceased's mother [name withheld]. The Supreme Court dismissed his appeal on 12.11.2009 (Crl.A. Nos. 1440-1441/2008).", "court_quote": "RE-SOURCE: current quote matches SC judgment para 1 recital, not the cited HC judgment; replace with a verbatim passage from the HC 05.03.2008 text once opened", "court_quote_para": "null (must be set from HC text)", "confidence": "medium", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Death ref declined; HC convicted SHO of custodial death under IPC 304-II, 8 yrs RI + Rs 2 lakh fine.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2008-03-05", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "153 (2008) DLT 693", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote", "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/387672/pdf/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/663097/rp-tyagi-vs-state-govt-of-nct-of-delhi/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1316909/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-107" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-39-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2008-0019", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1114", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs State of NCT of Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs State of NCT of Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "P.S. Kashmere Gate, Delhi Police", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs State of NCT of Delhi", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 501 of 2008 (arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 40 of 2007)", "citation": "Delhi Man vs State of NCT of Delhi, decided 14 March 2008", "judges": [ "S. B. Sinha", "Harjit Singh Bedi" ], "judgment_date": "2008-03-14", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2008, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": null, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 279", "IPC 304A" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Delhi Police, P.S. Kashmere Gate", "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": "Head Constable, Delhi Police, P.S. Kashmere Gate" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi man" }, { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 2, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 0.5, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1722056/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Head Constable against his conviction under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC for driving a police mini-truck over the Ring Road divider into oncoming traffic, killing pillion rider a Delhi man The Court held the rash act was clearly not within the colour of duty, so neither Section 140 of the Delhi Police Act nor sanction pleas barred the prosecution. It sustained the conviction (six months' imprisonment plus fine as modified by the High Court) but, noting twenty years of litigation and an otherwise good career, directed release on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. The appellant had already been dismissed from service on account of the conviction. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Head Constable against his conviction under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC for driving a police mini-truck over the Ring Road divider into oncoming traffic, killing pillion rider a Delhi man The Court held the rash act was clearly not within the colour of duty, so neither Section 140 of the Delhi Police Act nor sanction pleas barred the prosecution. It sustained the conviction (six months' imprisonment plus fine as modified by the High Court) but, noting twenty years of litigation and an otherwise good career, directed release on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. The appellant had already been dismissed from service on account of the conviction.", "court_quote": "We are, therefore, of the opinion that the case of the appellant would not be covered by Section 140 and that the initiation of proceedings and the prosecution beyond three months from the date of accident was not beyond limitation.", "court_quote_para": "9", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Conviction of on-duty police driver for rash/negligent killing upheld (not colour of duty); probation granted after ~20 years litigation.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "[name withheld] vs State of NCT of Delhi, decided 14 March 2008", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2008-03-14", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "[name withheld] vs State of NCT of Delhi, decided 14 March 2008", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1722056/", "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-99" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-129-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2008-0020", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1176", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs Commissioner of Police and Others", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No. 4170 of 2001", "citation": "149(2008)DLT674; (2008) 04 DEL CK 0209", "judges": [ "Manmohan Sarin", "Manmohan" ], "judgment_date": "2008-04-11", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2008, "incident_date": "1986-06-13", "incident_year": 1986, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "NDPS Act 1985 s.21" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "1st Battalion, Delhi Police", "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, 1st Battalion, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 0, "sentence_type": null, "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1719822/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/919136/shri-v-jayapalan-appellant-hash-commissioner-of-police-and-others-respondent/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Constable was arrested on 13.6.1986 in FIR No. 211/1986 under Section 21 NDPS Act, convicted and sentenced to 10 years RI in 1987 and dismissed in 1988, but acquitted by the High Court on 6.1.1989 for non-proof beyond reasonable doubt and reinstated in 1996. A departmental inquiry on the same allegations found him guilty and on 10.2.1998 imposed forfeiture of five years approved service with pay reduction, upheld in appeal and by the CAT. The Court held Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980 was attracted since the acquittal rested substantially on technical non-compliance with Sections 42 and 50 NDPS Act, leaving suspicion capable of resting on the official. Departmental proceedings were therefore not without jurisdiction, and the writ petition was dismissed. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Constable was arrested on 13.6.1986 in FIR No. 211/1986 under Section 21 NDPS Act, convicted and sentenced to 10 years RI in 1987 and dismissed in 1988, but acquitted by the High Court on 6.1.1989 for non-proof beyond reasonable doubt and reinstated in 1996. A departmental inquiry on the same allegations found him guilty and on 10.2.1998 imposed forfeiture of five years approved service with pay reduction, upheld in appeal and by the CAT. The Court held Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980 was attracted since the acquittal rested substantially on technical non-compliance with Sections 42 and 50 NDPS Act, leaving suspicion capable of resting on the official. Departmental proceedings were therefore not without jurisdiction, and the writ petition was dismissed.", "court_quote": "we are of the view that the order passed by the Tribunal subserves the ends of justice and does not call for any interference in the exercise of writ jurisdiction.", "court_quote_para": "12", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Writ dismissed; forfeiture of 5 yrs service upheld despite criminal acquittal on NDPS technicalities.", "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": "2008-04-11", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "149(2008)DLT674; (2008) 04 DEL CK 0209", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1719822/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/919136/shri-v-jayapalan-appellant-hash-commissioner-of-police-and-others-respondent/", "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-107" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-39-007", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2008-0011", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0123", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Alipur Man vs State of National Capital Territory of Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "Alipur Man vs State of National Capital Territory of Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Alipur", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Alipur Man vs State of National Capital Territory of Delhi", "case_number": "LPA No. 2552/2005 (against order dated 24.08.2005 in WP(Crl) 1292/2003)", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Ajit Prakash Shah", "S. Muralidhar" ], "judgment_date": "2008-07-02", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2008, "incident_date": "1999-08-15", "incident_year": 1999, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "SHO", "unit": "Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.9, "jev_p_culpable": 0.08, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "SHO, Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.9, "jev_p_culpable": 0.11, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.88, "jev_p_culpable": 0.17, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.89, "jev_p_culpable": 0.17, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.91, "jev_p_culpable": 0.14, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.89, "jev_p_culpable": 0.14, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.9, "jev_p_culpable": 0.15, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Station Alipur, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 7, "victims": [ { "age": 47, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Alipur man, age 47" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 500000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/107445637/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court enhanced compensation to Rs 5 lakh with 9% interest for the custodial torture-murder of HSEB lineman an Alipur man (47) at PS Alipur. Picked up at dawn on Independence Day 1999 while carrying cash withdrawn for his cancer-dead sister's family, he was beaten through the day with third-degree methods and declared brought dead that evening with bruises over two-thirds of his body. The SHO, an SI, a head constable and four constables were suspended with a criminal case and Crime Branch probe, and a doctors' panel twice confirmed custodial death. Treating the claim as violation of Article 21 rather than ex gratia, the Court enhanced the Single Judge's Rs 3 lakh award. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court enhanced compensation to Rs 5 lakh with 9% interest for the custodial torture-murder of HSEB lineman an Alipur man (47) at PS Alipur. Picked up at dawn on Independence Day 1999 while carrying cash withdrawn for his cancer-dead sister's family, he was beaten through the day with third-degree methods and declared brought dead that evening with bruises over two-thirds of his body. The SHO, an SI, a head constable and four constables were suspended with a criminal case and Crime Branch probe, and a doctors' panel twice confirmed custodial death. Treating the claim as violation of Article 21 rather than ex gratia, the Court enhanced the Single Judge's Rs 3 lakh award.", "court_quote": "It appears that during his interrogation and questioning by the police, he was beaten up and tortured and third degree methods were used as a result of which he suffered severe bodily injuries.", "court_quote_para": "2", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Lineman tortured to death over carried cash; award enhanced Rs 3L to Rs 5L with interest.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2008-07-02", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 500,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "LPA No. 2552/2005 (against order dated 24.08.2005 in WP(Crl) 1292/2003)", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/107445637/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-36" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-032", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2008-0012", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0485", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable v. State (Crl.A. No. 740/2001, part of Khem Chand batch)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable v. State (Crl.A. No. 740/2001, part of Khem Chand batch)", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Shikarpur village", "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable v. State (Crl.A. No. 740/2001, part of Khem Chand batch)", "case_number": "Crl.A. No. 740/2001 (with Crl.A. Nos. 5/2000, 813/2001 and 719/2002)", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Manmohan Sarin", "S.L. Bhayana" ], "judgment_date": "2008-07-07", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2008, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": null, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 376", "IPC 354" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_gpt56:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "unclear", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": 3, "gender": "female", "descriptor": "Shikarpur village girl, age 3", "name": null } ], "victims_redacted": [ { "age": 3, "gender": "female", "descriptor": "a 3-year-old girl" } ], "anonymised": true, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 12, "compensation_inr": 50000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/18498179/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Delhi Police Constable brutally raped his three-and-a-half-year-old neighbour 'V' in Shikarpur village, leaving vaginal tears that hospitalised the child for eleven days. The trial court convicted him under sections 376 and 354 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment with a Rs 50,000 fine as victim compensation. The High Court held that the appellant, himself a member of the law-enforcing agency, had perpetrated a ghastly crime on a helpless child, and upheld the conviction. It reduced the sentence to a net twelve years' rigorous imprisonment without remission, recording his undertaking to pay the fine, shift his family out of Shikarpur and never contact the victim's family. Scope note: a neighbourhood (non-custodial) rape by a serving constable, so the subcategory is recorded as other rather than custodial rape. The convicted Delhi Police constable in this record is a different man from the convicted Delhi Police constable of Andha Mugal police post covered in companion records of this dataset; this judgment gives the unit only as Delhi Police. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Delhi Police Constable brutally raped his three-and-a-half-year-old neighbour 'V' in Shikarpur village, leaving vaginal tears that hospitalised the child for eleven days. The trial court convicted him under sections 376 and 354 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment with a Rs 50,000 fine as victim compensation. The High Court held that the appellant, himself a member of the law-enforcing agency, had perpetrated a ghastly crime on a helpless child, and upheld the conviction. It reduced the sentence to a net twelve years' rigorous imprisonment without remission, recording his undertaking to pay the fine, shift his family out of Shikarpur and never contact the victim's family. Scope note: a neighbourhood (non-custodial) rape by a serving constable, so the subcategory is recorded as other rather than custodial rape.", "court_quote": "We, accordingly, uphold the conviction but reduce the sentence to a net term of 12 years of RI exclusive of remissions.", "court_quote_para": "n/a (paras unnumbered in this judgment; operative order at p.16 of 56)", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi Police constable's child-rape conviction upheld; life cut to net 12 years RI plus Rs 50,000 to 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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl.A. No. 740/2001 (with Crl.A. Nos. 5/2000, 813/2001 and 719/2002)", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2008-07-07", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl.A. No. 740/2001 (with Crl.A. Nos. 5/2000, 813/2001 and 719/2002)", "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": [ "court_quote", "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/18498179/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-43" ], "merged_case_id": "SWCUSTOD-017", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2009-0011", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0672", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Nand Nagri Police Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "display_title_redacted": "Nand Nagri Police Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Shahdara", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Nand Nagri", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Nand Nagri", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Nand Nagri Police Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "case_number": "Crl.A. No.163/2004", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Aruna Suresh" ], "judgment_date": "2009-02-06", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2009, "incident_date": "1998-03-23", "incident_year": 1998, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(2) r/w s.13(1)(d)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Police Station Nand Nagri", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Police Station Nand Nagri" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "female", "name": null, "descriptor": "Nand Nagri woman" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 1.5, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/86687864/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Sub-Inspector of PS Nand Nagri, who had arrested [name withheld], demanded Rs.4,000 from the arrestee's mother [name withheld] on 23 March 1998 at Karkardooma Courts for getting her son released on bail; she complained to the CBI and a trap on 24 March 1998 caught him accepting the bribe at the police station. The Special Judge convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, 1988 (1 year and 1.5 years RI with fines, concurrent). The High Court held demand and acceptance proved through the complainant, shadow witness and trap recovery, rejected pleas of defective sanction and false implication, and dismissed the appeal, directing surrender within a week.", "summary_verified": "Sub-Inspector of PS Nand Nagri, who had arrested [name withheld], demanded Rs.4,000 from the arrestee's mother [name withheld] on 23 March 1998 at Karkardooma Courts for getting her son released on bail; she complained to the CBI and a trap on 24 March 1998 caught him accepting the bribe at the police station. The Special Judge convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, 1988 (1 year and 1.5 years RI with fines, concurrent). The High Court held demand and acceptance proved through the complainant, shadow witness and trap recovery, rejected pleas of defective sanction and false implication, and dismissed the appeal, directing surrender within a week.", "court_quote": "no merit in this appeal. The same is accordingly dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "49", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Bribery conviction of SI (Rs.4,000 trap) upheld; 1.5y max RI concurrent; surrender ordered.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl.A. No.163/2004", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2009-02-06", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl.A. No.163/2004", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/86687864/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-50" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP7-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2009-0002", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0092", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable and others v. State (Delhi Admn.)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Head Constable and others v. State (Delhi Admn.)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Post Andha Mugal, PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable and others v. State (Delhi Admn.)", "case_number": "Crl. Appeal No. 33/1993", "citation": null, "judges": [ "V.B. Gupta", "Badar Durrez Ahmed" ], "judgment_date": "2009-03-06", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2009, "incident_date": "1980-08-06", "incident_year": 1980, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 302", "IPC 34", "IPC 330" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Police Post Andha Mugal, PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.04, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Police Post Andha Mugal, PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Post Andha Mugal, PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.13, "jev_p_culpable": 0.93, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Post Andha Mugal, PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Post Andha Mugal, PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.11, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Post Andha Mugal, PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi" } ], "officer_count": 3, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/5987865/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. A Delhi man @ a Delhi man was picked up from Subzi Mandi railway station on 1 August 1980, illegally confined for five days at Andha Mugal police post, and beaten regularly to extract a confession about stolen property. On 5 August 1980 the head constable poured kerosene on him while the two constables set him on fire; he died the next day. The court relied on the magistrate-recorded dying declaration, corroborated by post-mortem evidence of extensive bruises and abrasions, rejecting the suicide defence. It dismissed the appeal, upholding life imprisonment with Rs 5,000 fine each under Sections 302/34 IPC and the additional two-year terms under Sections 330/34 IPC for the two constables, and ordered the appellants, who were on bail, to be taken into custody.", "summary_verified": "A Delhi man @ a Delhi man was picked up from Subzi Mandi railway station on 1 August 1980, illegally confined for five days at Andha Mugal police post, and beaten regularly to extract a confession about stolen property. On 5 August 1980 the head constable poured kerosene on him while the two constables set him on fire; he died the next day. The court relied on the magistrate-recorded dying declaration, corroborated by post-mortem evidence of extensive bruises and abrasions, rejecting the suicide defence. It dismissed the appeal, upholding life imprisonment with Rs 5,000 fine each under Sections 302/34 IPC and the additional two-year terms under Sections 330/34 IPC for the two constables, and ordered the appellants, who were on bail, to be taken into custody.", "court_quote": "The present appellants with pre-determination had put the deceased on fire knowing fully well that this would result into his death. The fact that deceased was kept in illegal custody in police post Andha Mugal from 1st August, 1980 to 5th August, 1980 has also been duly proved on record.", "court_quote_para": "73", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Crl A 33/1993 verified on Indian Kanoon; appeal dismissed, life terms upheld.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl. Appeal No. 33/1993", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2009-03-06", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl. Appeal No. 33/1993", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/5987865/", "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-03", "chunk-r02", "chunk-r10" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2009-0027", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0790", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Ex. Const. Pawan Kumar vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Ex. Const. Pawan Kumar vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS New Usmanpur", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Ex. Const. Pawan Kumar vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No. 991 of 2008", "citation": "LAWS(DLH)-2009-7-405", "judges": [ "A. K. Sikri", "Suresh Kait" ], "judgment_date": "2009-07-03", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2009, "incident_date": "2005-03-04", "incident_year": 2005, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "false_implication_fabrication", "subcategory": "false_implication_fabrication", "subcategory_display": "false implication fabrication", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Constitution Art. 311(2)(b)", "IPC 307", "IPC 34", "Arms Act s.27", "IPC 211", "IPC 120B" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Pawan Kumar", "rank": "Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Police, beat Ambedkar Basti, PS New Usmanpur", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Pawan Kumar", "display": "Pawan Kumar (Constable)" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" }, { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" }, { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 3, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/51535345/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.the-laws.com/encyclopedia/browse/Case?caseId=109002053300&title=ex-cont-pawan-kumar-vs-govt-of-nct-of-delhi-and-ors" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of former Delhi Police Constable Pawan Kumar and upheld his dismissal from service without enquiry under Article 311(2)(b). The court found that for money he had conspired with known criminals to stage a fake gunshot attack on Anil Mahajan on 4 March 2005 in Ambedkar Basti so that Mahajan could falsely implicate his relatives in an attempt-to-murder case (FIR 74/2005). The court held that Gulfam's Section 164 CrPC statement and the phone-call links supplied solid material showing the constable's criminal propensity, and that retaining an officer capable of misusing official power to implicate innocents would endanger witnesses. It found no infirmity in the disciplinary authority's satisfaction that holding an enquiry was not reasonably practicable. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of former Delhi Police Constable Pawan Kumar and upheld his dismissal from service without enquiry under Article 311(2)(b). The court found that for money he had conspired with known criminals to stage a fake gunshot attack on Anil Mahajan on 4 March 2005 in Ambedkar Basti so that Mahajan could falsely implicate his relatives in an attempt-to-murder case (FIR 74/2005). The court held that Gulfam's Section 164 CrPC statement and the phone-call links supplied solid material showing the constable's criminal propensity, and that retaining an officer capable of misusing official power to implicate innocents would endanger witnesses. It found no infirmity in the disciplinary authority's satisfaction that holding an enquiry was not reasonably practicable.", "court_quote": "The petitioner herein belongs to the Disciplined Force. When material has surfaced on record showing links of the petitioner with criminal elements and also that conspiring with such hardened criminals, the petitioner allegedly implicated innocent persons in a false criminal case, forming an opinion that those victims would be reluctant to depose against the petitioner in a departmental inquiry is well founded.", "court_quote_para": "20", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; dismissal of constable for staging false-implication conspiracy upheld.", "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": "2009-07-03", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "LAWS(DLH)-2009-7-405", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/51535345/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.the-laws.com/encyclopedia/browse/Case?caseId=109002053300&title=ex-cont-pawan-kumar-vs-govt-of-nct-of-delhi-and-ors", "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-60" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-18-007", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2009-0028", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1178", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State (CBI)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State (CBI)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Vinay Nagar", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Vinay Nagar", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State (CBI)", "case_number": "Crl.A. No. 73/2001", "citation": "(2009) 07 DEL CK 0398", "judges": [ "G.S. Sistani" ], "judgment_date": "2009-07-31", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2009, "incident_date": "1995-09-21", "incident_year": 1995, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Delhi Police, Police Station Vinay Nagar", "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": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police, Police Station Vinay Nagar" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Vinay Nagar man" }, { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Vinay Nagar man" }, { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Vinay Nagar man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 3, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/910073/darshan-lal-vs-state-cbi/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/13075717/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. ASI of PS Vinay Nagar demanded Rs 1,000 from a Vinay Nagar man to release his detained cousin and friend, threatening to plant a knife on them, and was caught in a CBI trap on 21 September 1995. The Special Judge convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d)/13(2) of the PC Act in January 2001. The Delhi High Court held the complainant's account of demand and acceptance was corroborated by the shadow witness, recovery witness and trap officer, and rejected challenges to sanction and minor contradictions. It sustained the conviction but reduced the Section 13(1)(d)/13(2) sentence from three to two years RI given the 14-year pendency, and dismissed the appeal.", "summary_verified": "ASI of PS Vinay Nagar demanded Rs 1,000 from a Vinay Nagar man to release his detained cousin and friend, threatening to plant a knife on them, and was caught in a CBI trap on 21 September 1995. The Special Judge convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d)/13(2) of the PC Act in January 2001. The Delhi High Court held the complainant's account of demand and acceptance was corroborated by the shadow witness, recovery witness and trap officer, and rejected challenges to sanction and minor contradictions. It sustained the conviction but reduced the Section 13(1)(d)/13(2) sentence from three to two years RI given the 14-year pendency, and dismissed the appeal.", "court_quote": "I am of the considered opinion that a clear cut case is made out against the appellant of having demanded the illegal gratification in terms of money (Rs. 1,000/-) and having accepted the same.", "court_quote_para": "42", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; conviction sustained, s.13 sentence reduced 3yr to 2yr (agent overstated sentence).", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2009) 07 DEL CK 0398", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2009-07-31", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2009) 07 DEL CK 0398", "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/910073/darshan-lal-vs-state-cbi/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/13075717/", "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-108" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-40-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2009-0016", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0673", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Armed Police Constable (No.7570/DAP) vs Union of India & Anr.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Armed Police Constable (No.7570/DAP) vs Union of India & Anr.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Delhi Armed Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Armed Police Constable (No.7570/DAP) vs Union of India & Anr.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No.2087/2001", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Madan B. Lokur", "A.K. Pathak" ], "judgment_date": "2009-10-12", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2009, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": 1997, "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 (No.7570/DAP)", "unit": "Delhi Armed Police", "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 (No.7570/DAP), Delhi Armed Police" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/133842986/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "Constable was dismissed on 24 June 1997 under Article 311(2)(b) without a regular enquiry for association with the Bhoori gang and failure to report his knowledge of the April 1997 murder of K.S. Rana; his appeal, revision and CAT challenge all failed. The Court held there was material showing gang association and that he admitted knowing of the murder yet never informed his superiors, upheld dispensing with enquiry, and found no perversity in the concurrent orders. The writ was dismissed. No civilian victim of the officer himself is identified; the finding concerns criminal nexus and concealment, not absenteeism alone. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Constable was dismissed on 24 June 1997 under Article 311(2)(b) without a regular enquiry for association with the Bhoori gang and failure to report his knowledge of the April 1997 murder of K.S. Rana; his appeal, revision and CAT challenge all failed. The Court held there was material showing gang association and that he admitted knowing of the murder yet never informed his superiors, upheld dispensing with enquiry, and found no perversity in the concurrent orders. The writ was dismissed. No civilian victim of the officer himself is identified; the finding concerns criminal nexus and concealment, not absenteeism alone.", "court_quote": "no merit in this writ petition. Dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "18", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Dismissal for gang association and concealing murder knowledge upheld under Art 311(2)(b).", "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": "2009-10-12", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) No.2087/2001", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/133842986/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-50" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP7-005", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2009-0009", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0094", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police SHO v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police SHO v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Shahdara", "district_at_time": "East Delhi", "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Vivek Vihar, Delhi", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police SHO v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)", "case_number": "Crl. Appeal Nos. 1440-1441 of 2008", "citation": "(2009) 17 SCC 445", "judges": [ "Harjit Singh Bedi", "J.M. Panchal" ], "judgment_date": "2009-11-12", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2009, "incident_date": "1987-08-24", "incident_year": 1987, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 304 Part II" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "SHO", "unit": "PS Vivek Vihar, Delhi", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "SHO, PS Vivek Vihar, Delhi" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 2, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 5, "compensation_inr": 500000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1316909/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. After a constable was stabbed on 16 August 1987, PS Vivek Vihar police picked up family members and neighbours of suspects a Delhi man and a Delhi man and confined them at the station as hostages until the duo surrendered. When the two were produced on 24 August 1987, SHO and others beat them severely; a Delhi man died the next day at Lok Nayak hospital. The SDM's inquest indicted the police, though a second inquest blamed the public and almost all witnesses turned hostile over 17 years. The Supreme Court held the concurrent findings of the trial court and High Court germane, confirmed the Section 304-II conviction, but reduced the sentence from eight to five years given the appellant's age and the lapse of time, raising the fine from Rs 2 lakh to Rs 5 lakh payable as compensation to the deceased's mother. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "After a constable was stabbed on 16 August 1987, PS Vivek Vihar police picked up family members and neighbours of suspects a Delhi man and a Delhi man and confined them at the station as hostages until the duo surrendered. When the two were produced on 24 August 1987, SHO and others beat them severely; a Delhi man died the next day at Lok Nayak hospital. The SDM's inquest indicted the police, though a second inquest blamed the public and almost all witnesses turned hostile over 17 years. The Supreme Court held the concurrent findings of the trial court and High Court germane, confirmed the Section 304-II conviction, but reduced the sentence from eight to five years given the appellant's age and the lapse of time, raising the fine from Rs 2 lakh to Rs 5 lakh payable as compensation to the deceased's mother.", "court_quote": "In the background of the above facts and that the conviction has been made under Sec.304 Part II of the IPC, we confirm the conviction as recorded by the High Court but reduce the sentence from 8 years to five years and increase the fine from rupees two lacs to five lacs.", "court_quote_para": "n/a", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC appeal verified on Indian Kanoon; conviction confirmed, 5 yr + Rs 5L fine-as-compensation.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2009) 17 SCC 445", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2009-11-12", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2009) 17 SCC 445", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/1316909/", "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-03", "chunk-r02", "chunk-r10" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2010-0002", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0111", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "State vs Govindpuri Police Sub-Inspector", "display_title_redacted": "State vs Govindpuri Police Sub-Inspector", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Govindpuri", "police_station_or_unit": "P.S. Sriniwaspuri", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "State vs Govindpuri Police Sub-Inspector", "case_number": "CRL.A. No. 176/1995", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Sanjay Kishan Kaul", "Ajit Bharihoke" ], "judgment_date": "2010-01-15", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2010, "incident_date": "1986-09-19", "incident_year": 1986, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_by_hc", "sections": [ "IPC 304 Part I" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "P.S. Sriniwaspuri", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_gpt56:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "unclear", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.1, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, P.S. Sriniwaspuri" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Govindpuri man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 10, "compensation_inr": 50000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/156141267/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court set aside SI 's trial-court acquittal and convicted him of culpable homicide not amounting to murder for the custodial death of theft suspect [name withheld]. Picked up from his Govindpuri jhuggi on 19 September 1986 in FIR 365/1986, the victim, who had no injuries when picked up, suffered nine injuries in custody and died of coma caused by a head blow; the respondent admitted the deceased was in his custody throughout. The Court rejected the TB and jeep-jerk defences and the sanction objection, holding the officer resorted to third-degree methods to extract a confession. It imposed 10 years RI plus Rs 55,000 fine (Rs 50,000 to the closest relative; six months RI in default). Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court set aside SI 's trial-court acquittal and convicted him of culpable homicide not amounting to murder for the custodial death of theft suspect [name withheld]. Picked up from his Govindpuri jhuggi on 19 September 1986 in FIR 365/1986, the victim, who had no injuries when picked up, suffered nine injuries in custody and died of coma caused by a head blow; the respondent admitted the deceased was in his custody throughout. The Court rejected the TB and jeep-jerk defences and the sanction objection, holding the officer resorted to third-degree methods to extract a confession. It imposed 10 years RI plus Rs 55,000 fine (Rs 50,000 to the closest relative; six months RI in default).", "court_quote": "The result of the above discussion is that the impugned judgment of acquittal is set aside and the respondent is convicted for the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part 1 IPC.", "court_quote_para": "37", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; trial acquittal set aside, SI convicted u/s 304-I, 10 years RI.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2010-01-15", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "CRL.A. No. 176/1995", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/156141267/", "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-28" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-020", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2010-0022", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1180", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No. 1310/2010", "citation": "(2010) 03 DEL CK 0033", "judges": [ "Mool Chand Garg", "Anil Kumar" ], "judgment_date": "2010-03-04", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2010, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": null, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980 r.15(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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": "Head Constable, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/361481/chhote-lal-appellant-hash-govt-of-nct-of-delhi-and-others-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/Browse/Case?caseId=100102945000&title=chhote-lal-vs-govt-of-nct-of-delhi" ], "summary": "Head Constable of Delhi Police faced departmental proceedings for demanding and accepting Rs 45,000 as consideration for securing another person's appointment to a government job, and was dismissed from service on 24 October 2007. His departmental appeal was rejected in February 2008 and the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed his challenge in February 2009. The Delhi High Court held he could not show a case of no evidence or violation of natural justice, noting evidence of guilt in abundance and his wife's undisputed return of Rs 17,000. It dismissed the writ petition, leaving the dismissal from service intact. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Head Constable of Delhi Police faced departmental proceedings for demanding and accepting Rs 45,000 as consideration for securing another person's appointment to a government job, and was dismissed from service on 24 October 2007. His departmental appeal was rejected in February 2008 and the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed his challenge in February 2009. The Delhi High Court held he could not show a case of no evidence or violation of natural justice, noting evidence of guilt in abundance and his wife's undisputed return of Rs 17,000. It dismissed the writ petition, leaving the dismissal from service intact.", "court_quote": "For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal dated 12th February, 2009. There are no such illegalities or irregularities in the order of the Tribunal which will require interference by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction.", "court_quote_para": "9", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; dismissal of Delhi Police head constable for bribe-taking upheld.", "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": "2010-03-04", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2010) 03 DEL CK 0033", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/361481/chhote-lal-appellant-hash-govt-of-nct-of-delhi-and-others-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/Browse/Case?caseId=100102945000&title=chhote-lal-vs-govt-of-nct-of-delhi", "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-108" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-40-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2010-0025", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0784", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Surender Singh vs State of Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "Surender Singh vs State of Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": "East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Mayur Vihar, Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Mayur Vihar", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Surender Singh vs State of Delhi", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 202 of 2008", "citation": "(2010) 03 DEL CK 0195", "judges": [ "Pradeep Nandrajog", "Suresh Kait" ], "judgment_date": "2010-03-18", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2010, "incident_date": "2002-06-30", "incident_year": 2002, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "disproportionate_force", "subcategory": "disproportionate_force", "subcategory_display": "disproportionate force", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 302", "IPC 307" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Surender Singh", "rank": "Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "PS Mayur Vihar, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.98, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Surender Singh", "display": "Surender Singh (Constable)" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Mayur Vihar, Delhi man" }, { "age": null, "gender": "female", "name": null, "descriptor": "Mayur Vihar, Delhi woman" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 2, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/382635/surender-singh-appellant-hash-state-of-delhi-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/surender-singh-v-statewatermark-1635732.pdf", "https://lawsathi.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Surender_Singh_v__State__NCT_of_Delhi_.pdf" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police constable Surender Singh and upheld his conviction for shooting dead civilian a Mayur Vihar, Delhi man with his service SAF carbine inside PS Mayur Vihar on 30 June 2002, also injuring woman head constable The Court held eyewitness police testimony and ballistic linkage proved he chased the deceased into the reporting room firing repeatedly, rejecting his claim of an accidental discharge during a scuffle as a version never put to the eyewitnesses. It imputed knowledge for the Section 307 conviction since he fired indiscriminately knowing persons were in the room, and sustained the sentences of life imprisonment and seven years' rigorous imprisonment, noting life was the least penalty. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police constable Surender Singh and upheld his conviction for shooting dead civilian a Mayur Vihar, Delhi man with his service SAF carbine inside PS Mayur Vihar on 30 June 2002, also injuring woman head constable The Court held eyewitness police testimony and ballistic linkage proved he chased the deceased into the reporting room firing repeatedly, rejecting his claim of an accidental discharge during a scuffle as a version never put to the eyewitnesses. It imputed knowledge for the Section 307 conviction since he fired indiscriminately knowing persons were in the room, and sustained the sentences of life imprisonment and seven years' rigorous imprisonment, noting life was the least penalty.", "court_quote": "The appellant chased the deceased into the police station and shot him. While so doing, the appellant remained unmindful of the presence of the other police officers, one of whom was shot. It is apparent that the appellant is guilty of the offence of having murdered a Mayur Vihar, Delhi man", "court_quote_para": "10", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC upheld on-duty constable's murder and attempt-to-murder conviction for station shooting; life + 7 years RI.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2010) 03 DEL CK 0195", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2010-03-18", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2010) 03 DEL CK 0195", "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/382635/surender-singh-appellant-hash-state-of-delhi-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/surender-singh-v-statewatermark-1635732.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://lawsathi.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Surender_Singh_v__State__NCT_of_Delhi_.pdf", "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-59" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-18-001", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2010-0013", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0719", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "New Delhi Man and Others v. The Commissioner of Police and Others", "display_title_redacted": "New Delhi Man and Others v. The Commissioner of Police and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Sangam Vihar, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "New Delhi Man and Others v. The Commissioner of Police and Others", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No. 11079 of 2006", "citation": null, "judges": [ "S. Muralidhar" ], "judgment_date": "2010-03-25", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2010, "incident_date": "2002-05-23", "incident_year": 2002, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory_display": "illegal detention false imprisonment", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "IPC 376", "Constitution Art. 21" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "PS Sangam Vihar, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no", "key2_agy:no" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.21, "jev_p_culpable": 0.81, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, PS Sangam Vihar, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 532750, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/121309564/", "secondary_sources": [ "State v. Prempal, SC No. 29/2002, ASJ New Delhi, judgment dated 28-09-2004 (acquittal with findings of false implication)" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Justice S. Muralidhar) awarded mason Prempal Rs 5,32,750 with 6% interest from his arrest plus Rs 30,000 costs for years of police harassment culminating in a false rape case (FIR No. 231/2002). The Court relied on the final, unappealed 2004 acquittal by the Additional Sessions Judge, who had found a New Delhi man framed because he complained against police officials, tortured in custody, and reduced to a living corpse. Holding his Article 21 rights brazenly violated, the Court limited compensation to the FIR 231/2002 incarceration, directed the Commissioner to send a written apology to the family and review other pending cases against a New Delhi man, and noted the IO had earned only a forfeiture-of-service punishment.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Justice S. Muralidhar) awarded mason Prempal Rs 5,32,750 with 6% interest from his arrest plus Rs 30,000 costs for years of police harassment culminating in a false rape case (FIR No. 231/2002). The Court relied on the final, unappealed 2004 acquittal by the Additional Sessions Judge, who had found a New Delhi man framed because he complained against police officials, tortured in custody, and reduced to a living corpse. Holding his Article 21 rights brazenly violated, the Court limited compensation to the FIR 231/2002 incarceration, directed the Commissioner to send a written apology to the family and review other pending cases against a New Delhi man, and noted the IO had earned only a forfeiture-of-service punishment.", "court_quote": "In light of the overwhelming evidence discussed threadbare in the judgment of the learned ASJ, which has attained finality, there can be no manner of doubt that Petitioner1 has been treated most unreasonably, unfairly by the police and his fundamental rights under Article 21 were brazenly violated by the Respondents.", "court_quote_para": "22", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment text verified on Indian Kanoon; Rs 5,32,750 + interest + costs award matches.", "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": "2010-03-25", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 532,750.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "W.P.(C) No. 11079 of 2006", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/121309564/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "State v. Prempal, SC No. 29/2002, ASJ New Delhi, judgment dated 28-09-2004 (acquittal with findings of false implication)", "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-53" ], "merged_case_id": "SWILLEGA-067", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2010-0015", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0674", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Patel Nagar Man vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Patel Nagar Man vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Patel Nagar", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Patel Nagar / Tihar Jail", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Patel Nagar Man vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No.5520/2007", "citation": null, "judges": [ "S. Muralidhar" ], "judgment_date": "2010-06-03", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2010, "incident_date": "2007-06-12", "incident_year": 2007, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Police Station Patel Nagar", "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": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, Police Station Patel Nagar" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Patel Nagar man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 654584, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/166322090/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Sewage labourer a Patel Nagar man was arrested by Delhi Police on 9 June 2007 under Sections 107/151 CrPC, sent to Tihar Jail on 10 June 2007, and died there on 12 June 2007 with multiple ante-mortem injuries; a medical review board confirmed homicidal death. The Court rejected explanations of self-inflicted injury, held Delhi Police had violated the D.K. Basu guidelines in the arrest and remand, and found a clear Article 21 violation. It directed the GNCTD to pay Rs.6,54,584 compensation plus Rs.15,000 costs, with minors' shares kept in fixed deposits. Tihar custodial officials were not individually named in the order. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Sewage labourer a Patel Nagar man was arrested by Delhi Police on 9 June 2007 under Sections 107/151 CrPC, sent to Tihar Jail on 10 June 2007, and died there on 12 June 2007 with multiple ante-mortem injuries; a medical review board confirmed homicidal death. The Court rejected explanations of self-inflicted injury, held Delhi Police had violated the D.K. Basu guidelines in the arrest and remand, and found a clear Article 21 violation. It directed the GNCTD to pay Rs.6,54,584 compensation plus Rs.15,000 costs, with minors' shares kept in fixed deposits. Tihar custodial officials were not individually named in the order.", "court_quote": "homicidal death of late a Patel Nagar man which took place while he was in judicial custody in the Tihar Jail.", "court_quote_para": "33", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Homicidal death in custody established; D.K. Basu violations by police; Rs.6,54,584 plus costs awarded.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2010-06-03", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 654,584.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "W.P.(C) No.5520/2007", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/166322090/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-50" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP7-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2010-0036", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1181", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable and others vs CBI", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable and others vs CBI", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Gokulpuri", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Gokulpuri", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable and others vs CBI", "case_number": "Crl.A. Nos. 82 & 75/2002", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Sanjiv Khanna" ], "judgment_date": "2010-11-02", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2010, "incident_date": "1994-03-31", "incident_year": 1994, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 120B", "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(2) r/w s.13(1)(d)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police, Police Station Gokulpuri", "role": "convicted", "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, Delhi Police, Police Station Gokulpuri" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police, Police Station Gokulpuri", "role": "named_only", "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": "Head Constable, Delhi Police, Police Station Gokulpuri" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Gokulpuri man" }, { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Gokulpuri man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 2, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 3, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/69757344/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. PS Gokulpuri staff lifted a Gokulpuri man from his jhuggi on the night of 28-29 March 1994, detained him overnight and released him with a direction to pay Rs 5,000; Constable collected the treated notes at a Gokulpuri man's house on 31 March 1994 and was caught in the CBI trap. The Special Judge convicted [name withheld] and Head Constable in January 2002. The Delhi High Court held the case proved beyond doubt against [name withheld] through the complainant, shadow witness and recovery evidence with matching notes and pink washes, and upheld his conviction and sentence in full. It acquitted [name withheld] on benefit of doubt as he was absent from the trap spot, and disposed of both appeals accordingly.", "summary_verified": "PS Gokulpuri staff lifted a Gokulpuri man from his jhuggi on the night of 28-29 March 1994, detained him overnight and released him with a direction to pay Rs 5,000; Constable collected the treated notes at a Gokulpuri man's house on 31 March 1994 and was caught in the CBI trap. The Special Judge convicted [name withheld] and Head Constable in January 2002. The Delhi High Court held the case proved beyond doubt against [name withheld] through the complainant, shadow witness and recovery evidence with matching notes and pink washes, and upheld his conviction and sentence in full. It acquitted [name withheld] on benefit of doubt as he was absent from the trap spot, and disposed of both appeals accordingly.", "court_quote": "As held above, the conviction and sentence of [name withheld] u/s 7 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act is upheld and maintained.", "court_quote_para": "32", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; constable's PC Act conviction upheld, co-accused HC acquitted on benefit of doubt.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl.A. Nos. 82 & 75/2002", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2010-11-02", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl.A. Nos. 82 & 75/2002", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/69757344/", "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-108" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-40-005", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2011-0024", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0675", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Commissioner of Police (SHO at the time) vs Union of India & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Assistant Commissioner of Police (SHO at the time) vs Union of India & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Subzi Mandi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Subzi Mandi", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Commissioner of Police (SHO at the time) vs Union of India & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No.18511/2004", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Anil Kumar", "Veena Birbal" ], "judgment_date": "2011-02-21", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2011, "incident_date": "1980-08-06", "incident_year": 1980, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Commissioner of Police (SHO at the time)", "unit": "Police Station Subzi Mandi, Delhi Police", "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": "Assistant Commissioner of Police (SHO at the time), Police Station Subzi Mandi, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Subzi Mandi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": null, "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/27577082/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "In August 1980, a Subzi Mandi man @ a Subzi Mandi man was illegally detained at Andha Mughal police post under PS Subzi Mandi and died in custody on 6 August 1980; other personnel were convicted for the custodial death while the then SHO's role was pursued departmentally. The Court held the petitioner, as SHO, had knowledge of the illegal detention, took no action, and was instrumental in showing the death as suicide to hush up the matter. Finding grave misconduct and a proportionate penalty, it dismissed the writ against the CAT order, leaving intact the 50% permanent pension cut and 50% gratuity forfeiture imposed under the CCS (Pension) Rules after his 1997 superannuation. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "In August 1980, a Subzi Mandi man @ a Subzi Mandi man was illegally detained at Andha Mughal police post under PS Subzi Mandi and died in custody on 6 August 1980; other personnel were convicted for the custodial death while the then SHO's role was pursued departmentally. The Court held the petitioner, as SHO, had knowledge of the illegal detention, took no action, and was instrumental in showing the death as suicide to hush up the matter. Finding grave misconduct and a proportionate penalty, it dismissed the writ against the CAT order, leaving intact the 50% permanent pension cut and 50% gratuity forfeiture imposed under the CCS (Pension) Rules after his 1997 superannuation.", "court_quote": "no grounds to interfere with the order of the Tribunal dated 10th February, 2004 in O.A No.1855/2003", "court_quote_para": "20", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Writ dismissed; 50% pension cut plus 50% gratuity forfeiture for SHO's custodial-death cover-up role upheld.", "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": "2011-02-21", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) No.18511/2004", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/27577082/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-50" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP7-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2011-0028", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1177", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State (CBI)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State (CBI)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Gokulpuri", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Gokul Puri", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State (CBI)", "case_number": "Crl.A. No. 113/2003", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Rajiv Shakdher" ], "judgment_date": "2011-04-21", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2011, "incident_date": "1996-09-15", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Delhi Police, Police Station Gokul Puri", "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": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police, Police Station Gokul Puri" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Gokulpuri man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1136707/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/135488057/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. ASI, investigating officer of FIR No. 645/1996, demanded a Rs 2,000 bribe from the accused in that case and was caught in a CBI trap laid on the complainant's complaint of 21 September 1996. The Special Judge, Tis Hazari convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the PC Act in February 2003. The Delhi High Court held the trap evidence, including treated-note recovery and hand wash, proved demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt. It sustained the conviction and sentence, dismissed the appeal, and ordered the appellant taken into custody to serve the remaining sentence.", "summary_verified": "ASI, investigating officer of FIR No. 645/1996, demanded a Rs 2,000 bribe from the accused in that case and was caught in a CBI trap laid on the complainant's complaint of 21 September 1996. The Special Judge, Tis Hazari convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the PC Act in February 2003. The Delhi High Court held the trap evidence, including treated-note recovery and hand wash, proved demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt. It sustained the conviction and sentence, dismissed the appeal, and ordered the appellant taken into custody to serve the remaining sentence.", "court_quote": "I am of the view that the case of the prosecution against the Appellant has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Resultantly, the impugned judgment and sentence imposed by the trial court is sustained.", "court_quote_para": "33", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; PC Act conviction of Delhi Police ASI sustained on appeal.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl.A. No. 113/2003", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2011-04-21", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl.A. No. 113/2003", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1136707/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/135488057/", "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-108" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-40-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2011-0007", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0099", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Commissioner of Police vs State thr. CBI", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Assistant Commissioner of Police vs State thr. CBI", "state": "Delhi", "district": "New Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi (Connaught Place)", "police_station_or_unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Commissioner of Police vs State thr. CBI", "case_number": "Crl. Appeal Nos. 2231, 2476, 2477-2483 and 2484 of 2009", "citation": "(2011) 6 SCC 1; AIR 2011 SC 1748", "judges": [ "Harjit Singh Bedi", "C.K. Prasad" ], "judgment_date": "2011-05-02", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2011, "incident_date": "1997-03-31", "incident_year": 1997, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "fake_encounter_extrajudicial_killing", "subcategory": "fake_encounter_extrajudicial_killing", "subcategory_display": "fake encounter extrajudicial killing", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 302", "IPC 34", "IPC 307", "IPC 193", "IPC 201", "IPC 203" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Commissioner of Police", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Assistant Commissioner of Police, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Inspector", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.4, "jev_p_culpable": 0.55, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Inspector, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.48, "jev_p_culpable": 0.51, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.44, "jev_p_culpable": 0.52, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.43, "jev_p_culpable": 0.5, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.46, "jev_p_culpable": 0.51, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.47, "jev_p_culpable": 0.52, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.41, "jev_p_culpable": 0.6, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.33, "jev_p_culpable": 0.61, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.39, "jev_p_culpable": 0.62, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 10, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "New Delhi man" }, { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "New Delhi man" }, { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 3, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/708584/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/30424145/" ], "summary": "The Supreme Court (Harjit Singh Bedi, J.) dismissed the appeals of ten Delhi Police Crime Branch officials and upheld their life sentences for the Connaught Place fake encounter of 31 March 1997. Tracking wanted criminal Mohd. Yaseen, Inspector mistook bearded businessman [name withheld] for him; two police parties surrounded the victims' Maruti Esteem at the Barakhamba Road red light and fired 34 shots, killing two occupants and grievously injuring the third. The CBI exposed the cover-up — no shot was fired from inside the car, the 7.65mm pistol was planted, and the policemen's injuries came from police cross-fire — and the Court held the firing was with common intention to annihilate the occupants, spurred by hopes of reward and promotion, rejecting self-defence, superior-orders, sanction and Section 140 Delhi Police Act pleas. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court (Harjit Singh Bedi, J.) dismissed the appeals of ten Delhi Police Crime Branch officials and upheld their life sentences for the Connaught Place fake encounter of 31 March 1997. Tracking wanted criminal Mohd. Yaseen, Inspector mistook bearded businessman [name withheld] for him; two police parties surrounded the victims' Maruti Esteem at the Barakhamba Road red light and fired 34 shots, killing two occupants and grievously injuring the third. The CBI exposed the cover-up — no shot was fired from inside the car, the 7.65mm pistol was planted, and the policemen's injuries came from police cross-fire — and the Court held the firing was with common intention to annihilate the occupants, spurred by hopes of reward and promotion, rejecting self-defence, superior-orders, sanction and Section 140 Delhi Police Act pleas.", "court_quote": "On an overall view of the evidence in the case and in the light of the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the parties, we find no fault with the judgments of the trial court as well as the High Court. We, accordingly, dismiss all these appeals.", "court_quote_para": "86", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Primary judgment verified: SC dismissed all appeals; 10 policemen's life sentences for fake encounter upheld.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2011) 6 SCC 1; AIR 2011 SC 1748", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2011-05-02", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2011) 6 SCC 1; AIR 2011 SC 1748", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote_para", "sections" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/708584/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/30424145/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-15", "chunk-r09" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-008", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2011-0025", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0676", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Jahangir Puri Police Sub-Inspector vs CBI", "display_title_redacted": "Jahangir Puri Police Sub-Inspector vs CBI", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Jahangir Puri", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Jahangir Puri", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Jahangir Puri Police Sub-Inspector vs CBI", "case_number": "Crl.A. No.995/2002", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Suresh Kait" ], "judgment_date": "2011-05-06", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2011, "incident_date": "1995-07-12", "incident_year": 1995, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(2) r/w s.13(1)(d)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Police Station Jahangir Puri", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Police Station Jahangir Puri" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Jahangir Puri man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 3, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/163706068/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Sub-Inspector of PS Jahangir Puri demanded and accepted Rs.5,000 from complainant [name withheld] on 12 July 1995 as a reward for official favour in a bank-fraud complaint; the CBI trap the same evening recovered the tainted money from him at the police station with positive hand and pant wash. The Special Judge convicted him in December 2002 under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, 1988 (2 years and 3 years SI with fines, concurrent). The High Court held demand, acceptance, recovery and motive proved, confirmed the conviction and sentence, dismissed the appeal and cancelled bail bonds with surrender directions.", "summary_verified": "Sub-Inspector of PS Jahangir Puri demanded and accepted Rs.5,000 from complainant [name withheld] on 12 July 1995 as a reward for official favour in a bank-fraud complaint; the CBI trap the same evening recovered the tainted money from him at the police station with positive hand and pant wash. The Special Judge convicted him in December 2002 under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, 1988 (2 years and 3 years SI with fines, concurrent). The High Court held demand, acceptance, recovery and motive proved, confirmed the conviction and sentence, dismissed the appeal and cancelled bail bonds with surrender directions.", "court_quote": "no discrepancies in the order/judgment passed by trial Judge, therefore, I confirm the same.", "court_quote_para": "66", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Bribery conviction of SI (Rs.5,000 CBI trap) confirmed with 3y max SI; appeal dismissed.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl.A. No.995/2002", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2011-05-06", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl.A. No.995/2002", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/163706068/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-50" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP7-007", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2011-0029", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1179", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs Central Bureau of Investigation", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs Central Bureau of Investigation", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South East Delhi", "district_at_time": "South Delhi", "city_town": "Nizamuddin", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Nizamuddin", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs Central Bureau of Investigation", "case_number": "Crl.A. No. 746/2002", "citation": null, "judges": [ "M.L. Mehta" ], "judgment_date": "2011-05-23", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2011, "incident_date": "1996-10-28", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Delhi Police, Police Station Nizammuddin", "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": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police, Police Station Nizammuddin" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Nizamuddin man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/474866/", "secondary_sources": [ "http://indiankanoon.org/doc/758733/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. ASI, investigating officer of FIR No. 304/93, demanded Rs 500 per court hearing from the accused [name withheld] in exchange for weakening the evidence, and accepted the money at Patiala House Courts in a CBI trap on 28 October 1996. The Special Judge convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the PC Act and imposed four years RI per count in September 2001. The Delhi High Court held demand, acceptance and recovery proved beyond reasonable doubt through the complainant, shadow and recovery witnesses and matching tainted notes with positive hand washes. It maintained the conviction, reduced the sentence to two years RI on each count concurrent, dismissed the appeal and ordered the accused taken into custody.", "summary_verified": "ASI, investigating officer of FIR No. 304/93, demanded Rs 500 per court hearing from the accused [name withheld] in exchange for weakening the evidence, and accepted the money at Patiala House Courts in a CBI trap on 28 October 1996. The Special Judge convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the PC Act and imposed four years RI per count in September 2001. The Delhi High Court held demand, acceptance and recovery proved beyond reasonable doubt through the complainant, shadow and recovery witnesses and matching tainted notes with positive hand washes. It maintained the conviction, reduced the sentence to two years RI on each count concurrent, dismissed the appeal and ordered the accused taken into custody.", "court_quote": "while maintaining the conviction as awarded by the learned Special Judge, I am of the view that ends of justice would be met by sentencing the accused to two years of rigorous imprisonment on each count.", "court_quote_para": "33", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; PC Act conviction maintained with sentence reduced 4yr to 2yr per count.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl.A. No. 746/2002", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2011-05-23", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl.A. No. 746/2002", "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": [ "officers" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/474866/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "http://indiankanoon.org/doc/758733/", "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-108" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-40-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2011-0011", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0106", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "New Delhi Man vs Union of India; Jaspal Kaur vs Union of India", "display_title_redacted": "New Delhi Man vs Union of India; Jaspal Kaur vs Union of India", "state": "Delhi", "district": "New Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi (Connaught Place)", "police_station_or_unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "New Delhi Man vs Union of India; Jaspal Kaur vs Union of India", "case_number": "W.P.(C) Nos. 4756 & 5405/1997", "citation": "(2011) 125 DRJ 273", "judges": [ "S. Muralidhar" ], "judgment_date": "2011-07-04", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2011, "incident_date": "1997-03-31", "incident_year": 1997, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "fake_encounter_extrajudicial_killing", "subcategory": "fake_encounter_extrajudicial_killing", "subcategory_display": "fake encounter extrajudicial killing", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "IPC 302", "IPC 307", "IPC 34" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Satyavir Singh Rathi", "rank": "Assistant Commissioner of Police", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_agy:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_openrouter:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.24, "jev_p_culpable": 0.65, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "unclear", "name_public": "Satyavir Singh Rathi", "display": "Satyavir Singh Rathi (Assistant Commissioner of Police)" }, { "name": "Anil Kumar", "rank": "Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_agy:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_openrouter:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.3, "jev_p_culpable": 0.82, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "unclear", "name_public": "Anil Kumar", "display": "Anil Kumar (Inspector)" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "role": "convicted", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:unclear", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "unclear", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.82, "jev_p_culpable": 0.25, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "unclear", "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": "Shiv Kumar", "rank": "Head Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_agy:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_openrouter:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.81, "jev_p_culpable": 0.23, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "unclear", "name_public": "Shiv Kumar", "display": "Shiv Kumar (Head Constable)" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "role": "convicted", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:unclear", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "unclear", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.79, "jev_p_culpable": 0.25, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "unclear", "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "role": "convicted", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:unclear", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "unclear", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.8, "jev_p_culpable": 0.29, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "unclear", "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": "Sunil Kumar", "rank": "Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_agy:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_openrouter:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.76, "jev_p_culpable": 0.35, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "unclear", "name_public": "Sunil Kumar", "display": "Sunil Kumar (Constable)" }, { "name": "Subhash Chand", "rank": "Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_agy:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_openrouter:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.7, "jev_p_culpable": 0.32, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "unclear", "name_public": "Subhash Chand", "display": "Subhash Chand (Constable)" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "role": "convicted", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:unclear", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "unclear", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.76, "jev_p_culpable": 0.28, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "unclear", "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" }, { "name": "Sumer Singh", "rank": "Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_agy:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_openrouter:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.86, "jev_p_culpable": 0.18, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "unclear", "name_public": "Sumer Singh", "display": "Sumer Singh (Constable)" } ], "officer_count": 10, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 2, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 3000000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1334822/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/708584/", "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/30945257/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 15,00,000 each to the families of a New Delhi man and a New Delhi man, the two businessmen killed in the Connaught Place fake encounter of 31 March 1997, holding the State's liability to compensate for the callous and wanton killing undoubted. With ten Crime Branch policemen led by ACP Satyavir Singh Rathi already convicted of murder at trial, the Court computed pecuniary dependency with CPI-indexed non-pecuniary compensation, interest and costs. It held that criminal trial, disciplinary action and constitutional-court reparation are three independent facets of accountability, and expressed surprise that Delhi Police rules let convicted murderers remain in service pending appeal.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 15,00,000 each to the families of a New Delhi man and a New Delhi man, the two businessmen killed in the Connaught Place fake encounter of 31 March 1997, holding the State's liability to compensate for the callous and wanton killing undoubted. With ten Crime Branch policemen led by ACP Satyavir Singh Rathi already convicted of murder at trial, the Court computed pecuniary dependency with CPI-indexed non-pecuniary compensation, interest and costs. It held that criminal trial, disciplinary action and constitutional-court reparation are three independent facets of accountability, and expressed surprise that Delhi Police rules let convicted murderers remain in service pending appeal.", "court_quote": "a sum of Rs. 15 lakhs being the compensation amount payable to the Petitioner and her two children. The Registrar General will within a week thereafter pay Rs. 5,00,000/- each to Jaspal Kaur and her two children on proper identification.", "court_quote_para": "33", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Rs 15L x 2 verified via mirror snippets + quotation in 2022 sequel (primary 429).", "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": "2011-07-04", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 3,000,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "(2011) 125 DRJ 273", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote_para", "officers", "sections" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1334822/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/708584/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/30945257/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-27" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-015", "officers_named_public": 6, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2011-0041", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1182", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector vs CBI", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector vs CBI", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Vasant Kunj", "police_station_or_unit": "Vasant Kunj Police Station", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector vs CBI", "case_number": "Crl.A. No. 129/2003", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Rajiv Shakdher" ], "judgment_date": "2011-09-30", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2011, "incident_date": "1995-03-09", "incident_year": 1995, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Delhi Police, Vasant Kunj Police Station", "role": "convicted", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police, Vasant Kunj Police Station" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Vasant Kunj man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 3, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/758733/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/909322/satish-chander-appellant-hash-cbi-respondent/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. SI, in charge of the Rangpuri Hills area, demanded Rs 10,000 per month from stone-chips dealer a Vasant Kunj man to let his truck business run unimpeded, and accepted a Rs 3,000 instalment inside his room at Vasant Kunj police station in a CBI trap on 9 March 1995. The Special Judge convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the PC Act with three years RI per count in February 2003. The Delhi High Court held demand, acceptance and recovery proved by the complainant, shadow witness and trap officer with matching notes and positive phenolphthalein washes, despite hostile independent witnesses. It dismissed the appeal as without merit, cancelled bail and ordered the accused taken into custody forthwith.", "summary_verified": "SI, in charge of the Rangpuri Hills area, demanded Rs 10,000 per month from stone-chips dealer a Vasant Kunj man to let his truck business run unimpeded, and accepted a Rs 3,000 instalment inside his room at Vasant Kunj police station in a CBI trap on 9 March 1995. The Special Judge convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the PC Act with three years RI per count in February 2003. The Delhi High Court held demand, acceptance and recovery proved by the complainant, shadow witness and trap officer with matching notes and positive phenolphthalein washes, despite hostile independent witnesses. It dismissed the appeal as without merit, cancelled bail and ordered the accused taken into custody forthwith.", "court_quote": "For the reasons given hereinabove, I am of the view that the appeal is without merit and hence, consequently deserves to be dismissed. It is ordered accordingly. Resultantly, the accused shall be taken into custody forthwith.", "court_quote_para": "31", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; PC Act conviction of Delhi Police SI sustained, appeal dismissed.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl.A. No. 129/2003", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2011-09-30", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl.A. No. 129/2003", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/758733/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/909322/satish-chander-appellant-hash-cbi-respondent/", "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-108" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-40-006", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2011-0045", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0785", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Mahesh Babu vs State", "display_title_redacted": "Mahesh Babu vs State", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Sisa Mau, Kanpur (UP Police); offence near Old Delhi Railway Station", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Mahesh Babu vs State", "case_number": "Crl.A. No. 258 of 1997", "citation": "(2012) 1 AD 593 : (2012) 1 JCC 141", "judges": [ "Badar Durrez Ahmed", "Veena Birbal" ], "judgment_date": "2011-12-05", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2011, "incident_date": "1992-11-09", "incident_year": 1992, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 302", "Arms Act 1959 s.27" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Mahesh Babu", "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "PS Sisa Mau, District Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.04, "jev_p_culpable": 0.98, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Mahesh Babu", "display": "Mahesh Babu (Sub-Inspector)" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/393366/mahesh-babu-appellant-hash-state-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/85724739/", "https://pdf.lawlens.in/89b17eee-8c31-45c7-a0c9-5dbee458fda9" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of UP Police Sub-Inspector Mahesh Babu and upheld his conviction for murdering Delhi Police constable with his service revolver near Old Delhi railway station on 9 November 1992. The Court held eyewitness testimony and a ballistic match between the bullets in the body and the appellant's service revolver proved the intentional firing of four shots, rejecting the plea that the case fell under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC for want of sudden fight or heat of passion. It upheld the sentences of life imprisonment with Rs 1,000 fine under Section 302 IPC and three years' rigorous imprisonment with Rs 1,000 fine under Section 27 of the Arms Act, to run concurrently, and ordered the appellant taken into custody. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of UP Police Sub-Inspector Mahesh Babu and upheld his conviction for murdering Delhi Police constable with his service revolver near Old Delhi railway station on 9 November 1992. The Court held eyewitness testimony and a ballistic match between the bullets in the body and the appellant's service revolver proved the intentional firing of four shots, rejecting the plea that the case fell under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC for want of sudden fight or heat of passion. It upheld the sentences of life imprisonment with Rs 1,000 fine under Section 302 IPC and three years' rigorous imprisonment with Rs 1,000 fine under Section 27 of the Arms Act, to run concurrently, and ordered the appellant taken into custody.", "court_quote": "It is absolutely clear that the appellant wanted to finish constable and he succeeded in doing so.", "court_quote_para": "13", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC upheld UP SI's murder conviction for shooting a Delhi constable; life + 3 years RI concurrent.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2012) 1 AD 593 : (2012) 1 JCC 141", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2011-12-05", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2012) 1 AD 593 : (2012) 1 JCC 141", "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/393366/mahesh-babu-appellant-hash-state-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/85724739/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://pdf.lawlens.in/89b17eee-8c31-45c7-a0c9-5dbee458fda9", "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-59" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-18-002", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2012-0023", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0787", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Mahender Singh vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Mahender Singh vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Aaya Nagar Police Picket", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Mahender Singh vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No. 301 of 2012", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Badar Durrez Ahmed", "V.K. Jain" ], "judgment_date": "2012-01-27", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2012, "incident_date": "2008-02-19", "incident_year": 2008, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d)", "Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980 r.15(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Mahender Singh", "rank": "Head Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Aaya Nagar Police Picket, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.9, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Mahender Singh", "display": "Mahender Singh (Head Constable)" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "role": "named_only", "unit": "Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no", "key2_agy:no" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.09, "jev_p_culpable": 0.88, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 2, "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/25826872/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/docfragment/25826872/?formInput=authorid%3A%20v-k-jain" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police Head Constable Mahender Singh and upheld his removal from service for corrupt practice, holding the enquiry had proved that on 19 February 2008 he stopped a vigilance-decoy vehicle at Aaya Nagar picket for a seat-belt violation, settled the Rs 1,200 challan for a Rs 200 bribe, and had Constable collect the marked notes, which were recovered from [name withheld]'s pocket by the vigilance team on camera. The Court rejected the objection under Rule 15(2) of the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, holding that proceeding departmentally rather than by criminal trial under Sections 7/13(1)(d) of the PC Act was comparatively favourable to him and caused no prejudice. It held the removal penalty was not disproportionate and agreed that a police official indulging in such corrupt activities needs to be weeded out of the force. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police Head Constable Mahender Singh and upheld his removal from service for corrupt practice, holding the enquiry had proved that on 19 February 2008 he stopped a vigilance-decoy vehicle at Aaya Nagar picket for a seat-belt violation, settled the Rs 1,200 challan for a Rs 200 bribe, and had Constable collect the marked notes, which were recovered from [name withheld]'s pocket by the vigilance team on camera. The Court rejected the objection under Rule 15(2) of the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, holding that proceeding departmentally rather than by criminal trial under Sections 7/13(1)(d) of the PC Act was comparatively favourable to him and caused no prejudice. It held the removal penalty was not disproportionate and agreed that a police official indulging in such corrupt activities needs to be weeded out of the force.", "court_quote": "We are in agreement with the view that a police official indulging into such corrupt activities should not be allowed to continue in service and needs to be weeded out from the police force.", "court_quote_para": "10", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC upheld removal of HC caught on camera taking Rs 200 bribe via co-constable; vigilance trap proved.", "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": "2012-01-27", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) No. 301 of 2012", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/25826872/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/docfragment/25826872/?formInput=authorid%3A%20v-k-jain", "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-59" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-18-004", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2012-0005", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0511", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "In Re: Ramlila Maidan Incident dated 4/5.06.2011 v. Home Secretary, Union of India and Others", "display_title_redacted": "In Re: Ramlila Maidan Incident dated 4/5.06.2011 v. Home Secretary, Union of India and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Delhi Police (Ramlila Maidan crackdown force)", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "In Re: Ramlila Maidan Incident dated 4/5.06.2011 v. Home Secretary, Union of India and Others", "case_number": "Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 122 of 2011", "citation": "(2012) 5 SCC 1; [2012] 4 SCR 971", "judges": [ "B. S. Chauhan", "Swatanter Kumar" ], "judgment_date": "2012-02-23", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2012, "incident_date": "2011-06-04", "incident_year": 2011, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "disproportionate_force", "subcategory": "disproportionate_force", "subcategory_display": "disproportionate force", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [], "officer_count": 0, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "female", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi woman" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 500000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/17021567/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5767b133e691cb22da6d67a9", "https://lawsathi.in/judgements/pdf/sc/2012/en/2012_4_971_1152_EN.pdf" ], "summary": "The Supreme Court decided the suo motu case on the midnight 4/5 June 2011 police crackdown on Baba Ramdev sleeping supporters at Ramlila Maidan, Delhi, in which lathis, tear-gas shells and brick-batting were used to disperse the gathering, killing a Delhi woman and injuring many. The Court held the police action showed negligence and abuse of power with unjustifiable and brutal acts, while also finding contributory negligence by the organisers Trust. The Court directed disciplinary action against all erring police personnel irrespective of rank, registration of criminal cases, and ad hoc compensation of Rs 5 lakh to a Delhi woman kin, Rs 50,000 for grievous injuries and Rs 25,000 for simple injuries, with 25% of death/grievous awards payable by the Trust. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court decided the suo motu case on the midnight 4/5 June 2011 police crackdown on Baba Ramdev sleeping supporters at Ramlila Maidan, Delhi, in which lathis, tear-gas shells and brick-batting were used to disperse the gathering, killing a Delhi woman and injuring many. The Court held the police action showed negligence and abuse of power with unjustifiable and brutal acts, while also finding contributory negligence by the organisers Trust. The Court directed disciplinary action against all erring police personnel irrespective of rank, registration of criminal cases, and ad hoc compensation of Rs 5 lakh to a Delhi woman kin, Rs 50,000 for grievous injuries and Rs 25,000 for simple injuries, with 25% of death/grievous awards payable by the Trust.", "court_quote": "Take disciplinary action against all the erring police officers/personnel who have indulged in brick-batting, have resorted to lathi charge and excessive use of tear gas shells upon the crowd, have exceeded their authority or have acted in a manner not permissible under the prescribed procedures, rules or the standing orders and their actions have an element of criminality.", "court_quote_para": "234(a)", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC held midnight crackdown brutal; compensation plus disciplinary/criminal action directed.", "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": "2012-02-23", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 500,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "(2012) 5 SCC 1; [2012] 4 SCR 971", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/17021567/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5767b133e691cb22da6d67a9", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://lawsathi.in/judgements/pdf/sc/2012/en/2012_4_971_1152_EN.pdf", "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-32" ], "merged_case_id": "SWDISPRO-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2013-0022", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0793", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police personnel vs C.B.I.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police personnel vs C.B.I.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Post Usmanpur", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police personnel vs C.B.I.", "case_number": "CRL.A. No. 630 of 2002", "citation": "(2013) 4 AD 492 : (2013) 2 JCC 1143", "judges": [ "Mukta Gupta" ], "judgment_date": "2013-04-02", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2013, "incident_date": "1994-09-07", "incident_year": 1994, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": null, "unit": "Police Post Usmanpur, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "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": "Police personnel, Police Post Usmanpur, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 4, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/106936822/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of police-post official [name withheld] of Police Post Usmanpur and confirmed his conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs.200 bribe (balance of a Rs.500 demand) from complainant [name withheld]. A Delhi resident to release his seized welding machine and drop a challan. The CBI trap on 7 September 1994 recovered the treated notes from his shirt pocket. The court held the complainant's testimony, corroborated by the shadow and recovery witnesses, proved demand, acceptance and recovery beyond reasonable doubt, raising the Section 20 presumption which the appellant failed to rebut. It rejected the handshake explanation and held the co-accused constable's acquittal did not enure to the appellant, confirming the 4-year RI sentence. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of police-post official [name withheld] of Police Post Usmanpur and confirmed his conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs.200 bribe (balance of a Rs.500 demand) from complainant [name withheld]. A Delhi resident to release his seized welding machine and drop a challan. The CBI trap on 7 September 1994 recovered the treated notes from his shirt pocket. The court held the complainant's testimony, corroborated by the shadow and recovery witnesses, proved demand, acceptance and recovery beyond reasonable doubt, raising the Section 20 presumption which the appellant failed to rebut. It rejected the handshake explanation and held the co-accused constable's acquittal did not enure to the appellant, confirming the 4-year RI sentence.", "court_quote": "Further since the factum of demand, acceptance and recovery of Rs.200/- as bribe has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Further in view of acceptance being proved the presumption is raised against the Appellant under Section 20 of the PC Act for offence under Section 7 PC Act and thereafter the onus shifts on the Appellant to prove that the said money was as legal remuneration which the Appellant failed to prove.", "court_quote_para": "11", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; police-post official bribery conviction and 4-year sentence confirmed.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2013) 4 AD 492 : (2013) 2 JCC 1143", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2013-04-02", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2013) 4 AD 492 : (2013) 2 JCC 1143", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/106936822/", "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-60" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-19-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2013-0038", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1185", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "case_number": "Crl.A. No. 461/2003", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Siddharth Mridul" ], "judgment_date": "2013-11-27", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2013, "incident_date": "1995-07-26", "incident_year": 1995, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 120B", "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 4, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/34657353/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/908499/tirath-singh-rawat-appellant-hash-cbi-respondent/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Siddharth Mridul, J.) on 27 November 2013 dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector against his 2003 conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs. 5,000 bribe from property dealer a New Delhi man to dispose of a complaint against him. The court found that a CBI trap laid on 26 July 1995 caught the appellant arriving in a Sub-Inspector's uniform and that the tainted money was recovered from his co-accused. It held demand and acceptance proved, raised the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act which the appellant failed to rebut, and sustained the sentence of four years' rigorous imprisonment with fine. The court cancelled his bail bond and ordered him to be taken into custody forthwith. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Siddharth Mridul, J.) on 27 November 2013 dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector against his 2003 conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs. 5,000 bribe from property dealer a New Delhi man to dispose of a complaint against him. The court found that a CBI trap laid on 26 July 1995 caught the appellant arriving in a Sub-Inspector's uniform and that the tainted money was recovered from his co-accused. It held demand and acceptance proved, raised the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act which the appellant failed to rebut, and sustained the sentence of four years' rigorous imprisonment with fine. The court cancelled his bail bond and ordered him to be taken into custody forthwith.", "court_quote": "Accordingly, the appellant is found guilty under Section 120 IPC read with Sections 7 and 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act. The appellant is also found guilty and convicted for the substantive offences under Sections 7 and 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act.", "court_quote_para": "44", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "PC Act conviction of Delhi Police SI upheld on appeal; 4 years RI sustained, bail cancelled.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl.A. No. 461/2003", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2013-11-27", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl.A. No. 461/2003", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/34657353/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/908499/tirath-singh-rawat-appellant-hash-cbi-respondent/", "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-109" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-41-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2014-0016", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0792", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Inspector vs State (NCT of Delhi)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Inspector vs State (NCT of Delhi)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South West", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "District Crime Cell Mayapuri", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Inspector vs State (NCT of Delhi)", "case_number": "CRL.A. No. 236 of 2010", "citation": null, "judges": [ "V. K. Jain" ], "judgment_date": "2014-01-20", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2014, "incident_date": "2000-06-16", "incident_year": 2000, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "DIU South-West / District Crime Cell Mayapuri, Delhi Police", "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": "Inspector, DIU South-West / District Crime Cell Mayapuri, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/73328502/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court confirmed the conviction of Delhi Police Inspector [name withheld] for demanding and accepting a Rs.10,000 bribe from complainant [name withheld] for not registering a Section 325 IPC case against him. The ACB trap on 16 June 2000 at Munirka recovered the treated notes from his pant pocket, with a pink hand wash and tallied note numbers. The court held the complainant's testimony, corroborated by the panch witness and raiding officer plus the Section 20 presumption, left no reasonable doubt of criminal misconduct. It confirmed the conviction but reduced the sentence from 3 to 2 years RI on both counts given the 14-year pendency, with Section 428 benefit and surrender ordered. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court confirmed the conviction of Delhi Police Inspector [name withheld] for demanding and accepting a Rs.10,000 bribe from complainant [name withheld] for not registering a Section 325 IPC case against him. The ACB trap on 16 June 2000 at Munirka recovered the treated notes from his pant pocket, with a pink hand wash and tallied note numbers. The court held the complainant's testimony, corroborated by the panch witness and raiding officer plus the Section 20 presumption, left no reasonable doubt of criminal misconduct. It confirmed the conviction but reduced the sentence from 3 to 2 years RI on both counts given the 14-year pendency, with Section 428 benefit and surrender ordered.", "court_quote": "The appellant committed offence punishable under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 since being a public servant he accepted from the complainant gratification other than legal remuneration as a motive or reward for refraining from registering a case under Section 325 IPC against him.", "court_quote_para": "14", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; Inspector bribery conviction confirmed, sentence reduced 3 to 2 years RI.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "CRL.A. No. 236 of 2010", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2014-01-20", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "CRL.A. No. 236 of 2010", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2024-05-02", "action_type": "Appeal pending", "status": "Pending", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "As of 2 May 2024, an appeal arising from this judgment was pending before the Supreme Court of India (officers: [name withheld]); the judgment's findings had not been set aside on that date.", "disposition": "Later proceeding · Appeal pending", "source": "https://order.law/api/pdf/SCIN010040682014?order=5hcyd", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." } ], "later_proceedings": [ { "court": "Supreme Court of India", "date": "2024-05-02", "url": "https://order.law/api/pdf/SCIN010040682014?order=5hcyd", "outcome": "pending_appeal" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/73328502/", "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-60" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-19-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2014-0017", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1183", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs State", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs State", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East Delhi", "district_at_time": "East Delhi", "city_town": "Shahdara", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Seema Puri", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs State", "case_number": "Crl.A. No. 99/2000", "citation": "(2014) 1 ILR 773", "judges": [ "S.P. Garg" ], "judgment_date": "2014-01-30", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2014, "incident_date": "1996-05-12", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "disproportionate_force", "subcategory": "disproportionate_force", "subcategory_display": "disproportionate force", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 307", "IPC 34", "Arms Act 1959 s.27" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "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": "Head Constable, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Shahdara man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 3, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/51794509/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/404440/liyakat-ali-appellant-hash-state-respondent/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Delhi Police Head Constable fired his issued 9mm service revolver at a Shahdara man during a late-night quarrel between two groups near Shahdara on 12 May 1996, inflicting a bullet injury that hospitalised the victim for several days. The Sessions Court convicted him under Section 307/34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act in January 1999 while acquitting his two co-accused. The Delhi High Court held he had misused his official weapon, fired at a vital organ without reasonable apprehension and fled, and that he deserved no leniency given his nexus with criminals. It affirmed the conviction and sentence, dismissed the appeal and directed him to surrender on 6 February 2014 to serve the remaining sentence.", "summary_verified": "Delhi Police Head Constable fired his issued 9mm service revolver at a Shahdara man during a late-night quarrel between two groups near Shahdara on 12 May 1996, inflicting a bullet injury that hospitalised the victim for several days. The Sessions Court convicted him under Section 307/34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act in January 1999 while acquitting his two co-accused. The Delhi High Court held he had misused his official weapon, fired at a vital organ without reasonable apprehension and fled, and that he deserved no leniency given his nexus with criminals. It affirmed the conviction and sentence, dismissed the appeal and directed him to surrender on 6 February 2014 to serve the remaining sentence.", "court_quote": "Instead of using the official weapon for the purpose it was issued, he associated with criminals and went to the spot where there was quarrel over sharing of money among the two groups. The appellant had direct nexus with the individuals having criminal background and assisted them in their fight against the other.", "court_quote_para": "8", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; s.307/Arms Act conviction for service-weapon shooting 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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2014) 1 ILR 773", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2014-01-30", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2014) 1 ILR 773", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/51794509/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/404440/liyakat-ali-appellant-hash-state-respondent/", "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-108" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-41-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2014-0027", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0791", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs Central Bureau of Investigation", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs Central Bureau of Investigation", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Mayapuri", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs Central Bureau of Investigation", "case_number": "CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009", "citation": null, "judges": [ "S. Muralidhar" ], "judgment_date": "2014-05-30", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2014, "incident_date": "2001-07-10", "incident_year": 2001, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "PS Mayapuri, Delhi Police (IO, FIR No. 110/01)", "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": "Sub-Inspector, PS Mayapuri, Delhi Police (IO, FIR No. 110/01)" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 3, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49216877/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector [name withheld] and confirmed his conviction for demanding and accepting an Rs.8,000 bribe from complainant [name withheld] for not arresting him in a cross-case. The CBI trap on 10 July 2001 recovered the treated notes from the officer, and both his hand washes turned pink. The court held that the collective reading of the evidence of PWs 2 and 4 proved conscious demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt, attracting the presumption under Section 20 PC Act. It rejected the defences of planted money and defective procedure and held the 3-year RI sentence not disproportionate, cancelling bail bonds with surrender ordered. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector [name withheld] and confirmed his conviction for demanding and accepting an Rs.8,000 bribe from complainant [name withheld] for not arresting him in a cross-case. The CBI trap on 10 July 2001 recovered the treated notes from the officer, and both his hand washes turned pink. The court held that the collective reading of the evidence of PWs 2 and 4 proved conscious demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt, attracting the presumption under Section 20 PC Act. It rejected the defences of planted money and defective procedure and held the 3-year RI sentence not disproportionate, cancelling bail bonds with surrender ordered.", "court_quote": "The Court is of the view that a collective reading of the evidence of PWs 2 and 4 is sufficient to draw the conclusion regarding the conscious acceptance of the bribe amount by the Appellant. With both the elements i.e. conscious demand and conscious acceptance being proved by the prosecution in the above manner beyond reasonable doubt, the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act was certainly attracted in the present case.", "court_quote_para": "33", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; SI bribery conviction and 3-year sentence confirmed.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2014-05-30", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49216877/", "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-60" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-19-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2014-0031", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0794", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs State (NCT of Delhi)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable vs State (NCT of Delhi)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Post Red Fort, PS Kotwali", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs State (NCT of Delhi)", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 660 of 2008", "citation": "(2014) 09 DEL CK 0099", "judges": [ "S. Muralidhar" ], "judgment_date": "2014-09-29", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2014, "incident_date": "2001-02-16", "incident_year": 2001, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Post Red Fort, PS Kotwali, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "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, Police Post Red Fort, PS Kotwali, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 1.5, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/401590/vijay-narain-vs-state/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Constable of Police Post Red Fort and confirmed his conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs.500 monthly bribe from physically handicapped pavement bookseller a Delhi resident to let him sell books near Red Fort. The ACB trap on 16 February 2001 recovered treated notes from the constable's hand with pink hand washes. The court held the panch witness's evidence, corroborated by the complainant and Raid Officer, proved voluntary acceptance of the bribe beyond reasonable doubt, shifting the Section 20 burden which the appellant failed to discharge. It held the sentence of 1 year plus 1.5 years RI not excessive for a policeman, cancelling bail bonds with surrender ordered. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Constable of Police Post Red Fort and confirmed his conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs.500 monthly bribe from physically handicapped pavement bookseller a Delhi resident to let him sell books near Red Fort. The ACB trap on 16 February 2001 recovered treated notes from the constable's hand with pink hand washes. The court held the panch witness's evidence, corroborated by the complainant and Raid Officer, proved voluntary acceptance of the bribe beyond reasonable doubt, shifting the Section 20 burden which the appellant failed to discharge. It held the sentence of 1 year plus 1.5 years RI not excessive for a policeman, cancelling bail bonds with surrender ordered.", "court_quote": "For all the aforementioned reasons, the Court is satisfied that no error has been committed by the learned trial Court in convicting the Appellant for the offence under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act.", "court_quote_para": "28", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified via CourtKutchehry; constable monthly-bribe conviction confirmed.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2014) 09 DEL CK 0099", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2014-09-29", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2014) 09 DEL CK 0099", "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/401590/vijay-narain-vs-state/", "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-60" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-19-005", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2014-0036", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1184", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs State", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable vs State", "state": "Delhi", "district": "East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Mayur Vihar", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Mayur Vihar", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs State", "case_number": "Crl.A. No. 1336/2011", "citation": "(2015) 2 AD 184 : (2015) 1 JCC 314", "judges": [ "Sunita Gupta" ], "judgment_date": "2014-12-02", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2014, "incident_date": "2004-09-17", "incident_year": 2004, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "disproportionate_force", "subcategory": "disproportionate_force", "subcategory_display": "disproportionate force", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 307" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police, Police Station Kalyanpuri", "role": "convicted", "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, Delhi Police, Police Station Kalyanpuri" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Mayur Vihar man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 7, "compensation_inr": 20000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/7218631/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/401794/tarun-vikram-vs-state/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Delhi Police Constable, on patrolling duty with a.38 service revolver, shot a Mayur Vihar man in the chest during a road quarrel near Mayur Vihar around 12:30 AM on 17 September 2004, leaving him in ICU. The Trial Court convicted him under Section 307 IPC with ten years RI and a Rs 25,000 fine in September 2011. The Delhi High Court held the firing had no reasonable nexus with official duty so no sanction bar arose, and that the injured witness's testimony stood corroborated by medical and eyewitness evidence. It sustained the conviction, reduced the sentence to seven years RI, directed Rs 20,000 of any realised fine as compensation to the victim, and dismissed the appeal with that modification.", "summary_verified": "Delhi Police Constable, on patrolling duty with a.38 service revolver, shot a Mayur Vihar man in the chest during a road quarrel near Mayur Vihar around 12:30 AM on 17 September 2004, leaving him in ICU. The Trial Court convicted him under Section 307 IPC with ten years RI and a Rs 25,000 fine in September 2011. The Delhi High Court held the firing had no reasonable nexus with official duty so no sanction bar arose, and that the injured witness's testimony stood corroborated by medical and eyewitness evidence. It sustained the conviction, reduced the sentence to seven years RI, directed Rs 20,000 of any realised fine as compensation to the victim, and dismissed the appeal with that modification.", "court_quote": "The learned Trial Court has rightly analyzed the evidence and convicted the Appellant under Section 307 IPC. The findings do not call for any interference.", "court_quote_para": "54", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; s.307 conviction sustained, sentence cut 10yr to 7yr with victim compensation.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2015) 2 AD 184 : (2015) 1 JCC 314", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2014-12-02", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2015) 2 AD 184 : (2015) 1 JCC 314", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/7218631/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/401794/tarun-vikram-vs-state/", "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-108" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-41-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2014-0013", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0119", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Ex. Const. Satbir Singh and Anr. vs National Capital Territory of Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "Ex. Const. Satbir Singh and Anr. vs National Capital Territory of Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Badarpur", "police_station_or_unit": "P.S. Badarpur", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Ex. Const. Satbir Singh and Anr. vs National Capital Territory of Delhi", "case_number": "W.P.(C) No. 196/2003", "citation": null, "judges": [ "S. Ravindra Bhat", "Vipin Sanghi" ], "judgment_date": "2014-12-22", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2014, "incident_date": "1991-01-14", "incident_year": 1991, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": "Satbir Singh", "rank": "Constable", "unit": "P.S. Badarpur", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_agy:no(overruled by grok)", "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.11, "jev_p_culpable": 0.89, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Satbir Singh", "display": "Satbir Singh (Constable)" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "P.S. Badarpur", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_agy:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "no", "jev_risk": 0.24, "jev_p_culpable": 0.85, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, P.S. Badarpur" } ], "officer_count": 2, "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/197684988/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of two ex-constables and sustained their dismissal for misappropriating recovered case property. On patrol from P.S. Badarpur on 14 January 1991, they caught a thief and recovered Rs 1,38,000 but deposited only Rs 56,200, pocketing the rest; though acquitted in the criminal trial in 1999, a joint departmental enquiry had held misappropriation established and both were dismissed in October 1999. The Court held the departmental proceedings were properly initiated under Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules despite the acquittal, found no prejudice from document non-supply, and upheld the CAT order dismissing their challenge.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition of two ex-constables and sustained their dismissal for misappropriating recovered case property. On patrol from P.S. Badarpur on 14 January 1991, they caught a thief and recovered Rs 1,38,000 but deposited only Rs 56,200, pocketing the rest; though acquitted in the criminal trial in 1999, a joint departmental enquiry had held misappropriation established and both were dismissed in October 1999. The Court held the departmental proceedings were properly initiated under Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules despite the acquittal, found no prejudice from document non-supply, and upheld the CAT order dismissing their challenge.", "court_quote": "For these reasons, the Court sees no merit in the writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "26", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; dismissal for misappropriation of recovered cash 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": "2014-12-22", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) No. 196/2003", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/197684988/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-28" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-028", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2015-0020", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1190", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector vs Union of India & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector vs Union of India & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Special Branch, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector vs Union of India & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 5484/2004", "citation": null, "judges": [ "S. Ravindra Bhat", "Vipin Sanghi" ], "judgment_date": "2015-01-30", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2015, "incident_date": "1982-11-19", "incident_year": 1982, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980", "Delhi Police Act 1978" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Special Branch, Delhi Police", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Special Branch, Delhi Police" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/3182707/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (S. Ravindra Bhat and Vipin Sanghi, JJ.) on 30 January 2015 dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded that he wilfully absented himself from ASIAD control-room duty on 19 November 1982 despite direct orders, and in December 1982 circulated leaflets among Special Branch staff pressing personnel demands and instigating formation of a Delhi Police union. After an earlier dismissal was set aside on procedural grounds, a fresh enquiry held both charges proved and he was dismissed again on 4 June 1991. The court found no arbitrariness in the Disciplinary Authority's order, held principles of natural justice were adhered to, and declined to interfere with the Tribunal's orders. This is an internal-discipline case with no civilian victim. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (S. Ravindra Bhat and Vipin Sanghi, JJ.) on 30 January 2015 dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded that he wilfully absented himself from ASIAD control-room duty on 19 November 1982 despite direct orders, and in December 1982 circulated leaflets among Special Branch staff pressing personnel demands and instigating formation of a Delhi Police union. After an earlier dismissal was set aside on procedural grounds, a fresh enquiry held both charges proved and he was dismissed again on 4 June 1991. The court found no arbitrariness in the Disciplinary Authority's order, held principles of natural justice were adhered to, and declined to interfere with the Tribunal's orders. This is an internal-discipline case with no civilian victim.", "court_quote": "From the above discussion, we conclude that there is no arbitrariness in order of the Disciplinary Authority and, principles of natural justice have been adhered to by the Inquiry Officer. The Disciplinary Authority has proved both the charges on preponderance of probability, for which sufficient evidence had been led during the DE proceedings.", "court_quote_para": "29", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Dismissal of SI for insubordination and union activity upheld; 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": "2015-01-30", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) 5484/2004", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/3182707/", "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-109" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-42-005", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2015-0005", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0115", "alias_merged_ids": [ "CWC-1426" ], "display_title": "Dabri Police Sub-Inspector v. State (NCT of Delhi), CBI", "display_title_redacted": "Dabri Police Sub-Inspector v. State (NCT of Delhi), CBI", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Dabri", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Dabri", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Dabri Police Sub-Inspector v. State (NCT of Delhi), CBI", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 585 of 2015", "citation": "Criminal Appeal No. 585 of 2015 (SLP(Crl) 8919/2014)", "judges": [ "T. S. Thakur", "Kurian Joseph", "R. Banumathi" ], "judgment_date": "2015-04-07", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2015, "incident_date": "2001-01-12", "incident_year": 2001, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d)", "PC Act 1988 s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "P.S. Dabri", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.04, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, P.S. Dabri" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Dabri resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://orderlaw-bphmhzeseagsd2ce.z03.azurefd.net/cms-cnr-data/supreme_court_data/pdf_files/jonew/courtnic/rop/2014/33575/rop_260166.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/158999469/", "https://www.livelaw.in/amp/prevention-of-corruption-act-gives-no-scope-for-reform-hence-misplaced-leniency-should-not-be-shown-supreme-court/", "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/122227961/" ], "summary": "The Supreme Court dismissed SI 's appeal and finally upheld his conviction by the Special Judge (CBI), Delhi (CC 194/2001) and confirmed by the Delhi High Court (CRL.A. 326/2008), under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Court recorded that as a Sub-Inspector he demanded a bribe of Rs. 25,000 for releasing the nephew of the complainant, and the CBI Anti-Corruption Branch laid a trap on 13 January 2001. It analysed the penology of corruption offences, held the Act gives no scope for reform-based leniency, and observed that the keeper entrusted with law enforcement had become the poacher. The Court confirmed two years' rigorous imprisonment with a Rs. 15,000 fine on each count. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court dismissed SI 's appeal and finally upheld his conviction by the Special Judge (CBI), Delhi (CC 194/2001) and confirmed by the Delhi High Court (CRL.A. 326/2008), under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Court recorded that as a Sub-Inspector he demanded a bribe of Rs. 25,000 for releasing the nephew of the complainant, and the CBI Anti-Corruption Branch laid a trap on 13 January 2001. It analysed the penology of corruption offences, held the Act gives no scope for reform-based leniency, and observed that the keeper entrusted with law enforcement had become the poacher. The Court confirmed two years' rigorous imprisonment with a Rs. 15,000 fine on each count.", "court_quote": "As noticed by the High Court in the impugned judgment itself, the appellant was the sub-inspector of police entrusted with the task of law enforcement. The keeper had become the poacher. In such circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with the punishment awarded by the trial court and confirmed in appeal.", "court_quote_para": "22", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC judgment PDF verified; SI's ss.7/13 PC Act conviction and 2-yr sentence finally upheld.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Criminal Appeal No. 585 of 2015 (SLP(Crl) 8919/2014)", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2015-04-07", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Criminal Appeal No. 585 of 2015 (SLP(Crl) 8919/2014)", "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://orderlaw-bphmhzeseagsd2ce.z03.azurefd.net/cms-cnr-data/supreme_court_data/pdf_files/jonew/courtnic/rop/2014/33575/rop_260166.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/158999469/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/amp/prevention-of-corruption-act-gives-no-scope-for-reform-hence-misplaced-leniency-should-not-be-shown-supreme-court/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/122227961/", "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-28", "chunk-38" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-024", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2015-0016", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0677", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Seelampur Police Head Constable (Reader to Special Executive Magistrate) vs C.B.I.", "display_title_redacted": "Seelampur Police Head Constable (Reader to Special Executive Magistrate) vs C.B.I.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Seelampur", "police_station_or_unit": "SEM Court, Seelampur, East District", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Seelampur Police Head Constable (Reader to Special Executive Magistrate) vs C.B.I.", "case_number": "Crl.A. 15/2000", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Suresh Kait" ], "judgment_date": "2015-09-21", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2015, "incident_date": "1995-08-01", "incident_year": 1995, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(2) r/w s.13(1)(d)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable (Reader to Special Executive Magistrate)", "unit": "SEM Court, Seelampur", "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": "Head Constable (Reader to Special Executive Magistrate), SEM Court, Seelampur" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Seelampur man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 1, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/135209359/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Head Constable, Reader to the Special Executive Magistrate at Seelampur, demanded Rs.1,000 from complainant [name withheld] for cancellation of non-bailable warrants in Section 107/151 CrPC proceedings and signed a warrant-cancellation robkar bearing the SEM seal though the Magistrate had passed no such order. The CBI trap recovered the tainted money from his pant, and a handwriting expert proved his signature on the slip. The trial court convicted him in December 1999 under Sections 7 and 13(2)/13(1)(d) of the PC Act (2 years RI each). The High Court confirmed guilt but reduced each term to one year RI with fine, concurrent, noting the 20-year ordeal and loss of service, with surrender in two weeks. Incident month August 1995 only; day not stated.", "summary_verified": "Head Constable, Reader to the Special Executive Magistrate at Seelampur, demanded Rs.1,000 from complainant [name withheld] for cancellation of non-bailable warrants in Section 107/151 CrPC proceedings and signed a warrant-cancellation robkar bearing the SEM seal though the Magistrate had passed no such order. The CBI trap recovered the tainted money from his pant, and a handwriting expert proved his signature on the slip. The trial court convicted him in December 1999 under Sections 7 and 13(2)/13(1)(d) of the PC Act (2 years RI each). The High Court confirmed guilt but reduced each term to one year RI with fine, concurrent, noting the 20-year ordeal and loss of service, with surrender in two weeks. Incident month August 1995 only; day not stated.", "court_quote": "no discrepancy in the impugned judgment dated 14.12.1999 whereby the appellant was held guilty for the charged offences.", "court_quote_para": "44", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Bribery conviction of HC confirmed on handwriting + trap proof; sentence cut to 1y RI each count.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl.A. 15/2000", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2015-09-21", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl.A. 15/2000", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/135209359/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-50" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP7-008", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2015-0031", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0923", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable v. State of Delhi; [name withheld] v. State; [name withheld] v. State; [name withheld] v. State", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable v. State of Delhi; [name withheld] v. State; [name withheld] v. State; [name withheld] v. State", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "AATS, North-East District", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable v. State of Delhi; [name withheld] v. State; [name withheld] v. State; [name withheld] v. State", "case_number": "Crl.A. Nos. 112/2000, 135/2000, 148/2000 & 202/2000", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Sanjiv Khanna", "R. K. Gauba" ], "judgment_date": "2015-10-19", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2015, "incident_date": "1992-03-17", "incident_year": 1992, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 302", "IPC 34", "IPC 342" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "AATS, North-East District", "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, AATS, North-East District" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "AATS, North-East District", "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, AATS, North-East District" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "AATS, North-East District", "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": "Head Constable, AATS, North-East District" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "AATS, North-East District", "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, AATS, North-East District" } ], "officer_count": 4, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/27016926/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Division Bench upheld murder and wrongful-confinement convictions of four AATS (North-East) policemen for torturing a Delhi man to death. Picked up from his New Seelampur home in the early hours of 11 March 1992, he was kept in wholly unauthorised captivity, beaten over six days, and dumped critically injured at a private nursing home on 16 March 1992; he died on 17 March 1992. The court held the chain of circumstances complete and drew the custodial-death burden against the policemen, upholding Sections 302/34 and 342/34 while setting aside only the Section 330/34 count for want of extortion purpose. The convicts were directed to surrender within 15 days, and compensation to the next of kin under Section 357-A CrPC was recommended to DSLSA. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Division Bench upheld murder and wrongful-confinement convictions of four AATS (North-East) policemen for torturing a Delhi man to death. Picked up from his New Seelampur home in the early hours of 11 March 1992, he was kept in wholly unauthorised captivity, beaten over six days, and dumped critically injured at a private nursing home on 16 March 1992; he died on 17 March 1992. The court held the chain of circumstances complete and drew the custodial-death burden against the policemen, upholding Sections 302/34 and 342/34 while setting aside only the Section 330/34 count for want of extortion purpose. The convicts were directed to surrender within 15 days, and compensation to the next of kin under Section 357-A CrPC was recommended to DSLSA.", "court_quote": "The conviction and sentences passed for the offences under section 302 read with section 34 IPC and section 342 read with section 34 IPC are upheld against each of the four appellants.", "court_quote_para": "82", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC upheld murder + wrongful-confinement convictions of 4 AATS policemen.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl.A. Nos. 112/2000, 135/2000, 148/2000 & 202/2000", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2015-10-19", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl.A. Nos. 112/2000, 135/2000, 148/2000 & 202/2000", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/27016926/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-03", "chunk-r02" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2015-0011", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0343", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable v. State of NCT of Delhi (Delhi Police personnel v. State)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Head Constable v. State of NCT of Delhi (Delhi Police personnel v. State)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Andha Mughal Police Post", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable v. State of NCT of Delhi (Delhi Police personnel v. State)", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal Nos. 447 and 484 of 2010", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla", "Uday Umesh Lalit" ], "judgment_date": "2015-12-16", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2015, "incident_date": "1980-08-01", "incident_year": 1980, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 302", "IPC 34", "IPC 330" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Andha Mughal Police Post, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Andha Mughal Police Post, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Andha Mughal Police Post, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Andha Mughal Police Post, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Andha Mughal Police Post, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.4, "jev_p_culpable": 0.68, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Andha Mughal Police Post, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 3, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/163386750/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.supremecourtcases.com/narender-kumar-v-state-of-nct-of-delhi/", "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/createfile/67358/tp:pd" ], "summary": "The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of three Delhi policemen convicted for illegally confining a Delhi man @ a Delhi man at Andha Mughal police post from 1 to 5 August 1980, beating him every few hours to extort a theft confession, then burning him alive when the head constable poured kerosene and the constables lit matches. The Court believed the magistrate-recorded dying declaration naming all three, corroborated by extensive bruises at post-mortem, and rejected the suicide and alibi defences. All three kept life sentences under Section 302 read with Section 34 with Rs 5,000 fine, with two also serving two years under Section 330. The convictions came 35 years after the crime. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of three Delhi policemen convicted for illegally confining a Delhi man @ a Delhi man at Andha Mughal police post from 1 to 5 August 1980, beating him every few hours to extort a theft confession, then burning him alive when the head constable poured kerosene and the constables lit matches. The Court believed the magistrate-recorded dying declaration naming all three, corroborated by extensive bruises at post-mortem, and rejected the suicide and alibi defences. All three kept life sentences under Section 302 read with Section 34 with Rs 5,000 fine, with two also serving two years under Section 330. The convictions came 35 years after the crime.", "court_quote": "Having regard to our above conclusions, we do not find any merit in both the appeals. The appeals fail and the same are dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "20", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Life maintained for torturing detainee then burning him alive; dying declaration believed.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Criminal Appeal Nos. 447 and 484 of 2010", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2015-12-16", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Criminal Appeal Nos. 447 and 484 of 2010", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/163386750/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.supremecourtcases.com/narender-kumar-v-state-of-nct-of-delhi/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/createfile/67358/tp:pd", "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-30" ], "merged_case_id": "SUPREM-028", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2015-0012", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0112", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Patel Nagar Police Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.; [name withheld] vs C.B.I.; [name withheld] [name withheld] vs C.B.I.; Kewal Kishan Arora vs C.B.I.", "display_title_redacted": "Patel Nagar Police Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.; [name withheld] vs C.B.I.; [name withheld] [name withheld] vs C.B.I.; Kewal Kishan Arora vs C.B.I.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Patel Nagar", "police_station_or_unit": "P.S. Patel Nagar", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Patel Nagar Police Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.; [name withheld] vs C.B.I.; [name withheld] [name withheld] vs C.B.I.; Kewal Kishan Arora vs C.B.I.", "case_number": "CRL.A. Nos. 1220, 1167, 1423 & 1066/2012", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Indermeet Kaur" ], "judgment_date": "2015-12-22", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2015, "incident_date": "1986-08-22", "incident_year": 1986, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 304 Part I", "IPC 34", "IPC 342" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "P.S. Patel Nagar", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.07, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, P.S. Patel Nagar" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "P.S. Patel Nagar", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.07, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, P.S. Patel Nagar" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Patel Nagar man" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Patel Nagar man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 2, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 10, "compensation_inr": 50000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/44744771/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/delhi-hc-upholds-conviction-of-police-officers-in-a-19-year-old-custodial-death-case" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court upheld the CBI-court conviction of two Patel Nagar Sub-Inspectors for beating a Patel Nagar man to death in custody over an unmet illegal demand of Rs 10,000. On the intervening night of 22-23 August 1986 the officers picked up a Patel Nagar man from home, beat him and his intervening uncle a Patel Nagar man continuously en route and at the station, and a Patel Nagar man died with ten ante-mortem blunt injuries; the police then took him to hospitals to cover up the death. Relying on the nephew's complaint-FIR corroborated by medical evidence, the Court maintained 10 years RI under Section 304-I read with Section 34 plus one year under Section 342/34 and a Rs 25,000 fine from each convict payable as compensation to the widow (Rs 50,000 total), while acquitting a constable and the CFSL Scientific Officer co-accused and setting aside the Section 218/109 convictions. The appellants denied the charges and pleaded false implication. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court upheld the CBI-court conviction of two Patel Nagar Sub-Inspectors for beating a Patel Nagar man to death in custody over an unmet illegal demand of Rs 10,000. On the intervening night of 22-23 August 1986 the officers picked up a Patel Nagar man from home, beat him and his intervening uncle a Patel Nagar man continuously en route and at the station, and a Patel Nagar man died with ten ante-mortem blunt injuries; the police then took him to hospitals to cover up the death. Relying on the nephew's complaint-FIR corroborated by medical evidence, the Court maintained 10 years RI under Section 304-I read with Section 34 plus one year under Section 342/34 and a Rs 25,000 fine from each convict payable as compensation to the widow (Rs 50,000 total), while acquitting a constable and the CFSL Scientific Officer co-accused and setting aside the Section 218/109 convictions. The appellants denied the charges and pleaded false implication.", "court_quote": "It appears that the perverted minds of the two Senior Divisional Officers was not satisfied till they had beaten Gopi to death which was only because the poor man could not meet their illegal demand of Rs.10,000/-", "court_quote_para": "69", "confidence": "medium", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC conviction upheld per LiveLaw report (primary Indian Kanoon 429 at audit time); two SIs, 10 years RI each.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "CRL.A. Nos. 1220, 1167, 1423 & 1066/2012", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2015-12-22", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "CRL.A. Nos. 1220, 1167, 1423 & 1066/2012", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "compensation_inr", "summary" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/44744771/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/delhi-hc-upholds-conviction-of-police-officers-in-a-19-year-old-custodial-death-case", "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-28" ], "merged_case_id": "SWCUSTOD-020", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2017-0018", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1188", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Traffic Police Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Traffic Police Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Delhi Traffic Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Traffic Police Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 717/2017", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Sanjiv Khanna", "Chander Shekhar" ], "judgment_date": "2017-03-16", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2017, "incident_date": "2004-07-04", "incident_year": 2004, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980", "CCS (Leave) Rules 1972" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Traffic Police", "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, Delhi Traffic Police" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/124454578/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Sanjiv Khanna and Chander Shekhar, JJ.) on 16 March 2017 dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Traffic Police Constable and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded his wilful unauthorised absence from 4 July 2004 to 25 February 2009, over four years and seven months at one stretch, compounded by a false written statement about resuming duty and three past absences. It held the Central Administrative Tribunal's order dismissing his challenge was just and fair. The Disciplinary Authority had dismissed him on 23 April 2010 for grave misconduct rendering him unfit for police service. This is an internal-discipline case with no civilian victim. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Sanjiv Khanna and Chander Shekhar, JJ.) on 16 March 2017 dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Traffic Police Constable and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded his wilful unauthorised absence from 4 July 2004 to 25 February 2009, over four years and seven months at one stretch, compounded by a false written statement about resuming duty and three past absences. It held the Central Administrative Tribunal's order dismissing his challenge was just and fair. The Disciplinary Authority had dismissed him on 23 April 2010 for grave misconduct rendering him unfit for police service. This is an internal-discipline case with no civilian victim.", "court_quote": "In the factual matrix of the present case, we are satisfied that the order of the Tribunal is just and fair. This is a case of wilful unauthorised absence not for a small period, but for over 4 years and 7 months at one stretch and thereafter again for the period from 6 th April, 2009 till the order of dismissal was passed on 23rd April, 2010.", "court_quote_para": "7", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Dismissal of traffic constable for 4.5-year wilful absence upheld; 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": "2017-03-16", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) 717/2017", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/124454578/", "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-109" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-42-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2017-0020", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1191", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "New Delhi Woman vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "New Delhi Woman vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Shakarpur", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "New Delhi Woman vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 5810/2015", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Vipin Sanghi", "Deepa Sharma" ], "judgment_date": "2017-04-17", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2017, "incident_date": "2006-06-20", "incident_year": 2006, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory_display": "extortion", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/107705031/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Vipin Sanghi and Deepa Sharma, JJ.) on 17 April 2017 dismissed the writ petition of Smt. Kusum Chaudhary, widow of Delhi Police Constable, and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded that on 20 June 2006 he and a co-delinquent picked up a New Delhi man as a proclaimed offender and, though the Additional SHO ordered his release, demanded and took Rs. 20,000 for the release, with further recorded demands thereafter. It held the complainant's credibility unimpeached and corroborated by a neighbour witness, sustained the serious-misconduct finding, and refused family pension and arrears. The dismissal order dated 2 March 2007 was thus confirmed through appeal, Tribunal and High Court.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Vipin Sanghi and Deepa Sharma, JJ.) on 17 April 2017 dismissed the writ petition of Smt. Kusum Chaudhary, widow of Delhi Police Constable, and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded that on 20 June 2006 he and a co-delinquent picked up a New Delhi man as a proclaimed offender and, though the Additional SHO ordered his release, demanded and took Rs. 20,000 for the release, with further recorded demands thereafter. It held the complainant's credibility unimpeached and corroborated by a neighbour witness, sustained the serious-misconduct finding, and refused family pension and arrears. The dismissal order dated 2 March 2007 was thus confirmed through appeal, Tribunal and High Court.", "court_quote": "In our view, the aforesaid does not impinge on the credibility of the complainant PW-3 [name withheld]. This is for the reason that both Constable [name withheld] and Constable [name withheld] had together proceeded to the residence of PW-3 [name withheld] and they were together when the demand for Rs.25,000/- was made.", "court_quote_para": "26", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Dismissal of constable for extorting money for release upheld; widow's pension plea refused.", "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": "2017-04-17", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) 5810/2015", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/107705031/", "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-109" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-42-006", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2017-0033", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1189", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs Union of India & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable vs Union of India & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Special Staff, North East District", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs Union of India & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 4577/2017", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Rekha Palli", "Vipin Sanghi" ], "judgment_date": "2017-09-21", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2017, "incident_date": "1996-04-15", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory_display": "extortion", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Special Staff, North East District, Delhi Police", "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, Special Staff, North East District, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "unit": "Special Staff, North East District, Delhi Police", "role": "named_only", "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": "Police personnel, Special Staff, North East District, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 3, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/51246669/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Rekha Palli and Vipin Sanghi, JJ.) on 21 September 2017 dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police Constable and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded that on 15 April 1996 a four-man Special Staff team including the petitioner illegally picked up shopkeeper [name withheld] and his two servants on a false accusation of manufacturing spurious cold drinks, demanded Rs. 50,000, and released them on 16 April 1996 after receiving Rs. 30,000 as bribe. It held this was not a case of no evidence, finding the uncontroverted statement of complainant [name withheld] alone sufficient to hold the charges proved, and saw no infirmity in the Tribunal's order. The petitioner had been dismissed on 7 November 1997 after a joint departmental enquiry rejected his alibi defence. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Rekha Palli and Vipin Sanghi, JJ.) on 21 September 2017 dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police Constable and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded that on 15 April 1996 a four-man Special Staff team including the petitioner illegally picked up shopkeeper [name withheld] and his two servants on a false accusation of manufacturing spurious cold drinks, demanded Rs. 50,000, and released them on 16 April 1996 after receiving Rs. 30,000 as bribe. It held this was not a case of no evidence, finding the uncontroverted statement of complainant [name withheld] alone sufficient to hold the charges proved, and saw no infirmity in the Tribunal's order. The petitioner had been dismissed on 7 November 1997 after a joint departmental enquiry rejected his alibi defence.", "court_quote": "Having examined the record, including the findings of the Enquiry Officer and the order passed by Disciplinary Authority, we do not find that this is a case of 'no evidence'. In fact, we find that there was sufficient evidence before the Enquiry Officer to hold the Petitioner guilty of the charge levelled against him.", "court_quote_para": "20", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Dismissal for illegal detention and Rs.30,000 bribe upheld; charges held proved on evidence.", "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": "2017-09-21", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) 4577/2017", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/51246669/", "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-109" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-42-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2017-0034", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1186", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "New Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 8939/2017", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Vipin Sanghi", "Rekha Palli" ], "judgment_date": "2017-10-11", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2017, "incident_date": "2009-01-01", "incident_year": 2009, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13", "Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980 r.12" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/127404609/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Vipin Sanghi and Rekha Palli, JJ.) on 11 October 2017 dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police Constable and upheld his dismissal from service. The court noted he had been trapped and caught red-handed by the Anti-Corruption Branch accepting Rs. 3,000 as bribe after demanding Rs. 7,000 to stop harassing the complainant's brother (FIR No. 41/2009). A departmental enquiry examining six prosecution witnesses held the charge proved beyond any shadow of doubt, leading to dismissal on 7 March 2013. The court held his later criminal acquittal was on benefit of doubt and not honourable, so it did not entitle him to reinstatement under Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1980. Incident date year-only in judgment; recorded as 2009-01-01. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Vipin Sanghi and Rekha Palli, JJ.) on 11 October 2017 dismissed the writ petition of Delhi Police Constable and upheld his dismissal from service. The court noted he had been trapped and caught red-handed by the Anti-Corruption Branch accepting Rs. 3,000 as bribe after demanding Rs. 7,000 to stop harassing the complainant's brother (FIR No. 41/2009). A departmental enquiry examining six prosecution witnesses held the charge proved beyond any shadow of doubt, leading to dismissal on 7 March 2013. The court held his later criminal acquittal was on benefit of doubt and not honourable, so it did not entitle him to reinstatement under Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1980. Incident date year-only in judgment; recorded as 2009-01-01.", "court_quote": "For all the aforesaid reasons, we are of the view that the impugned judgment does not call for interference and the present petition is, accordingly, dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "34", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Dismissal of Delhi Police constable for bribe-taking upheld; criminal acquittal held not honourable.", "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": "2017-10-11", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) 8939/2017", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/127404609/", "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-109" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-42-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2017-0038", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1187", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 10556/2017", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Hima Kohli", "Rekha Palli" ], "judgment_date": "2017-11-28", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2017, "incident_date": "1996-02-08", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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": "Head Constable, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "female", "descriptor": "New Delhi woman" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/154434749/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Hima Kohli and Rekha Palli, JJ.) on 28 November 2017 dismissed in limine the writ petition of Delhi Police Head Constable and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded that he had contracted a second marriage on 8 February 1996 without legally divorcing his first wife, and that a full departmental enquiry in which both wives were examined held the charge of grave misconduct proved. It rejected his plea that the first marriage was unproved, noting corroboration from the ration card, CGHS card and nomination records. Relying on Union of India v. P. Gunasekaran, the court held dismissal for such misconduct unbecoming of a member of a disciplined force was not disproportionate. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Hima Kohli and Rekha Palli, JJ.) on 28 November 2017 dismissed in limine the writ petition of Delhi Police Head Constable and upheld his dismissal from service. The court recorded that he had contracted a second marriage on 8 February 1996 without legally divorcing his first wife, and that a full departmental enquiry in which both wives were examined held the charge of grave misconduct proved. It rejected his plea that the first marriage was unproved, noting corroboration from the ration card, CGHS card and nomination records. Relying on Union of India v. P. Gunasekaran, the court held dismissal for such misconduct unbecoming of a member of a disciplined force was not disproportionate.", "court_quote": "The impugned judgment dated 07.10.2016 is affirmed and upheld. The writ petition is dismissed in limine alongwith pending application, with no order as to costs.", "court_quote_para": "24", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Dismissal of head constable for bigamy upheld; misconduct held unbecoming of disciplined force.", "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": "2017-11-28", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) 10556/2017", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/154434749/", "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-109" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-42-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2017-0013", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0098", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs State", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs State", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Shahdara", "police_station_or_unit": "Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police (FIR 231/1995, PS Welcome)", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": "Division Bench: S. Muralidhar and I.S. Mehta JJ. (judgment authored by Muralidhar J.)", "case_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs State", "case_number": "Crl.A. Nos. 74, 88, 89, 91, 106 and 118 of 2001", "citation": "246 (2018) DLT 35", "judges": [ "S. Muralidhar", "I.S. Mehta" ], "judgment_date": "2017-12-14", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2017, "incident_date": "1995-07-30", "incident_year": 1995, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 304 Part II", "IPC 34", "IPC 452", "IPC 365" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.22, "jev_p_culpable": 0.93, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.29, "jev_p_culpable": 0.93, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.25, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "unit": "Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.26, "jev_p_culpable": 0.93, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "unit": "Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.25, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": null, "unit": "Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.27, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Police personnel, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 6, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Shahdara man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 8, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/158287279/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/delhi-hc-uphold-conviction-six-policemen-custodial-death-case-says-not-much-changed-since-d-k-basu-judgment" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (S. Muralidhar, J.) upheld the culpability of six Special Staff (North-East) policemen for the custodial killing of a Shahdara man Raided past midnight on 30/31 July 1995 over suspected illegal arms, he was beaten inside his house, while being dragged, on Shahdara flyover and at the Special Staff office, then handed to acquaintances instead of hospital; he died on 8 August 1995 of a traumatic head injury. The Court rejected the hypertension/fall defences and held Section 34 proved for the pre-planned team, but converted the murder convictions to Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 since the fatal blow could not be pinned on one accused, sentencing each to eight years' rigorous imprisonment concurrently, cancelling bail and ordering surrender forthwith. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (S. Muralidhar, J.) upheld the culpability of six Special Staff (North-East) policemen for the custodial killing of a Shahdara man Raided past midnight on 30/31 July 1995 over suspected illegal arms, he was beaten inside his house, while being dragged, on Shahdara flyover and at the Special Staff office, then handed to acquaintances instead of hospital; he died on 8 August 1995 of a traumatic head injury. The Court rejected the hypertension/fall defences and held Section 34 proved for the pre-planned team, but converted the murder convictions to Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 since the fatal blow could not be pinned on one accused, sentencing each to eight years' rigorous imprisonment concurrently, cancelling bail and ordering surrender forthwith.", "court_quote": "The Court is satisfied that although the culpability of the accused for the homicidal death of the deceased has been proved beyond reasonable doubt, the evidence of the prosecution does not precisely point out which of the accused caused the fatal injuries.", "court_quote_para": "91", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Primary judgment verified: 6 policemen's culpability upheld; 302/34 converted to 304-II/34, 8 years RI each.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "246 (2018) DLT 35", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2017-12-14", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "246 (2018) DLT 35", "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": [ "court_quote_para", "bench" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/158287279/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/delhi-hc-uphold-conviction-six-policemen-custodial-death-case-says-not-much-changed-since-d-k-basu-judgment", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-15", "chunk-r09" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-007", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2018-0001", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0093", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Lahori Gate Police Constable v. State (Through NCT of Delhi); Sher Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi; [name withheld] v. State", "display_title_redacted": "Lahori Gate Police Constable v. State (Through NCT of Delhi); Sher Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi; [name withheld] v. State", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Lahori Gate", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Lahori Gate, Delhi", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Lahori Gate Police Constable v. State (Through NCT of Delhi); Sher Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi; [name withheld] v. State", "case_number": "Crl. A. Nos. 54/2004, 81/2004 & 198/2004 (against trial judgment 06-01-2004)", "citation": null, "judges": [ "G. S. Sistani", "Sangita Dhingra Sehgal" ], "judgment_date": "2018-01-03", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2018, "incident_date": "1991-05-10", "incident_year": 1991, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 302", "IPC 330", "IPC 348", "IPC 304 Part II", "IPC 34" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "PS Lahori Gate, Delhi", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.11, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, PS Lahori Gate, Delhi" }, { "name": "Sher Singh", "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "PS Lahori Gate, Delhi", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_openrouter:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_gpt56:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": "no", "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Sher Singh", "display": "Sher Singh (Sub-Inspector)" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Lahori Gate man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/43971311/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Division Bench upheld the convictions of Constable and Sub-Inspector Sher Singh of PS Lahori Gate for beating night-watchman a Lahori Gate man to death. Picked up around midnight on 1-5-1991 and illegally confined at the police station, the victim was beaten mercilessly while his father was asked for bribes for his release; he died on 10-5-1991. The court called it a case where guardians of law became its transgressors, upholding [name withheld]'s sections 302/330/348 conviction and Sher Singh's section 304-II conviction with surrender in 10 days. SHO was acquitted for want of a properly framed charge, but the court directed disciplinary proceedings against all including [name withheld] for fabrication of evidence. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Division Bench upheld the convictions of Constable and Sub-Inspector Sher Singh of PS Lahori Gate for beating night-watchman a Lahori Gate man to death. Picked up around midnight on 1-5-1991 and illegally confined at the police station, the victim was beaten mercilessly while his father was asked for bribes for his release; he died on 10-5-1991. The court called it a case where guardians of law became its transgressors, upholding [name withheld]'s sections 302/330/348 conviction and Sher Singh's section 304-II conviction with surrender in 10 days. SHO was acquitted for want of a properly framed charge, but the court directed disciplinary proceedings against all including [name withheld] for fabrication of evidence.", "court_quote": "To conclude, we uphold the conviction of the appellant [name withheld] under Sections 302, 330 and 348 and the sentence imposed by the Trial Court. The conviction and sentence of appellant Sher Singh is also upheld. Appellant [name withheld] is acquitted of the charges against him.", "court_quote_para": "156", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Convictions of constable (s.302) and SI (s.304-II) upheld; SHO acquitted on charge defect — operative conclusion verified.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "Crl. A. Nos. 54/2004, 81/2004 & 198/2004 (against trial judgment 06-01-2004)", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2018-01-03", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "Crl. A. Nos. 54/2004, 81/2004 & 198/2004 (against trial judgment 06-01-2004)", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/43971311/", "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-03", "chunk-r02", "chunk-r10" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-002", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2019-0030", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1194", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable (Mounted) vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable (Mounted) vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Civil Lines", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable (Mounted) vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 4420/2019", "citation": "AIRONLINE 2019 DEL 642", "judges": [ "Vipin Sanghi", "Rekha Palli" ], "judgment_date": "2019-04-29", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2019, "incident_date": "2011-03-01", "incident_year": 2011, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 354", "IPC 34", "Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1980 r.8(a)", "Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1980 r.10", "Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1980 r.12" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable (Mounted)", "unit": "Delhi Police", "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 (Mounted), Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "female", "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi woman" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/129495196/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/984977/pawan-kumar-vs-commissioner-of-police-ors/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Delhi Police Constable (Mounted) [name withheld] faced a departmental inquiry from April 2011 for outraging the modesty of a woman constable and absence from duty, with FIR No. 42/2011 under Sections 354/34 IPC registered at PS Civil Lines against him and two other police officers. Found guilty departmentally, he was dismissed from service on 28.08.2012, lost his departmental appeal in April 2013, and lost before the CAT in September 2018, though acquitted in the criminal trial in May 2018. The Delhi High Court held the criminal acquittal was not clean and on merits so as to bar departmental proceedings under Rule 12, found he played the main role in the incident, and dismissed his writ petition as meritless. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Delhi Police Constable (Mounted) [name withheld] faced a departmental inquiry from April 2011 for outraging the modesty of a woman constable and absence from duty, with FIR No. 42/2011 under Sections 354/34 IPC registered at PS Civil Lines against him and two other police officers. Found guilty departmentally, he was dismissed from service on 28.08.2012, lost his departmental appeal in April 2013, and lost before the CAT in September 2018, though acquitted in the criminal trial in May 2018. The Delhi High Court held the criminal acquittal was not clean and on merits so as to bar departmental proceedings under Rule 12, found he played the main role in the incident, and dismissed his writ petition as meritless.", "court_quote": "We find that the petitioner has been held to be guilty of the charges of outraging the modesty of a woman, and remaining absent from duty by a duly constituted inquiry, where he was given due opportunity to cross-examine all the witnesses, including the complainant, who had, in no uncertain terms, stated the manner in which the petitioner had caught hold of her inappropriately. There is absolutely no reason to interfere with the well considered findings of the IO in the departmental inquiry or with the findings of the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority.", "court_quote_para": "8", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Dismissal for outraging modesty of woman constable upheld despite later criminal acquittal.", "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": "2019-04-29", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "AIRONLINE 2019 DEL 642", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/129495196/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/984977/pawan-kumar-vs-commissioner-of-police-ors/", "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-110" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-43-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2019-0032", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1195", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Armed Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCTD & Ors.; [name withheld] vs Govt. of NCTD & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Armed Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCTD & Ors.; [name withheld] vs Govt. of NCTD & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Delhi Armed Police (custody duty at AIIMS)", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Armed Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCTD & Ors.; [name withheld] vs Govt. of NCTD & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) Nos. 5926/2019 and 6044/2019", "citation": "(2019) 05 DEL CK 0188", "judges": [ "Vipin Sanghi", "Rajnish Bhatnagar" ], "judgment_date": "2019-05-28", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2019, "incident_date": "2011-10-27", "incident_year": 2011, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "dereliction_evidence_tampering", "subcategory": "dereliction_evidence_tampering", "subcategory_display": "dereliction evidence tampering", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1980 r.8(a)", "Standing Order No.125 of 2008" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Delhi Armed Police (DAP), Delhi Police", "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": "Head Constable, Delhi Armed Police (DAP), Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Delhi Armed Police (DAP), Delhi Police", "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, Delhi Armed Police (DAP), Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 2, "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/113388042/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/988573/ramesh-kumar-vs-govt-of-nctd-ors/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Head Constable and Constable of the Delhi Armed Police were detailed for the safe custody of undertrial prisoner Vikas Yadav, admitted in the ortho private ward of AIIMS, but colluded with him and took him out on the intervening night of 26/27 October 2011, returning only the next morning. Seven prosecution witnesses including AIIMS doctors and nursing staff supported the charge, and a joint departmental inquiry found both guilty, leading to their removal from the force, affirmed on appeal and by the CAT. The Delhi High Court held the gravity of the proved misconduct justified the punishment and dismissed both writ petitions. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Head Constable and Constable of the Delhi Armed Police were detailed for the safe custody of undertrial prisoner Vikas Yadav, admitted in the ortho private ward of AIIMS, but colluded with him and took him out on the intervening night of 26/27 October 2011, returning only the next morning. Seven prosecution witnesses including AIIMS doctors and nursing staff supported the charge, and a joint departmental inquiry found both guilty, leading to their removal from the force, affirmed on appeal and by the CAT. The Delhi High Court held the gravity of the proved misconduct justified the punishment and dismissed both writ petitions.", "court_quote": "The Disciplinary and the Appellate Authorities have said enough, and the gravity of the misconduct established against the petitioners is enough to justify the punishment imposed upon them.", "court_quote_para": "13", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Removal of two DAP men for custodial collusion with UTP upheld (judgment text cites Oct and Nov 2011).", "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": "2019-05-28", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2019) 05 DEL CK 0188", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/113388042/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/988573/ramesh-kumar-vs-govt-of-nctd-ors/", "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-110" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-43-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2020-0017", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1192", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "State vs Delhi Police Head Constable", "display_title_redacted": "State vs Delhi Police Head Constable", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Kirti Nagar", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "State vs Delhi Police Head Constable", "case_number": "CRL.A. 1405/2019", "citation": "AIRONLINE 2020 DEL 393", "judges": [ "Vibhu Bakhru" ], "judgment_date": "2020-03-03", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2020, "incident_date": "2003-07-02", "incident_year": 2003, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_by_hc", "sections": [ "IPC 409" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "PS Kirti Nagar, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "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": "Head Constable, PS Kirti Nagar, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 0, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 0.5, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/107422055/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/1030895/state-vs-shamsher-singh/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Vibhu Bakhru, J.) on 3 March 2020 allowed the State's appeal and set aside the ASJ's acquittal of Head Constable of PS Kirti Nagar, restoring his conviction under Section 409 IPC for criminal breach of trust. The court recorded that a 9 mm service pistol with 10 live cartridges issued to him on 2 July 2003 was never returned despite repeated visits by police officials, and held his shifting defence versions had little credibility. It reduced the sentence from three years to six months' rigorous imprisonment, noting he had paid the full monetary value of the weapon and faced disciplinary proceedings. The respondent's name is spelled [name withheld] in the cause title and [name withheld] in the memo of parties. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Vibhu Bakhru, J.) on 3 March 2020 allowed the State's appeal and set aside the ASJ's acquittal of Head Constable of PS Kirti Nagar, restoring his conviction under Section 409 IPC for criminal breach of trust. The court recorded that a 9 mm service pistol with 10 live cartridges issued to him on 2 July 2003 was never returned despite repeated visits by police officials, and held his shifting defence versions had little credibility. It reduced the sentence from three years to six months' rigorous imprisonment, noting he had paid the full monetary value of the weapon and faced disciplinary proceedings. The respondent's name is spelled [name withheld] in the cause title and [name withheld] in the memo of parties; the agent's impugned-order date of 10.06.2018 is corrected to 10.06.2016 per the judgment.", "court_quote": "This Court finds that the learned ASJ had grossly erred in concluding that the respondent had set up a probable defence. The defence set up by the respondent has little credibility. As noticed above, he appears to be adopting different versions at different times.", "court_quote_para": "56", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC reversed ASJ acquittal and restored s.409 IPC conviction of head constable; sentence cut to 6 months RI.", "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": "2020-03-03", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "AIRONLINE 2020 DEL 393", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/107422055/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/1030895/state-vs-shamsher-singh/", "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-109" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-43-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2021-0007", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0103", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Keshav Puram", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Post Shanti Nagar, P.S. Keshav Puram, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "case_number": "CRL.A. 289/2001", "citation": "AIRONLINE 2021 DEL 1636", "judges": [ "Anu Malhotra" ], "judgment_date": "2021-09-15", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2021, "incident_date": "1996-06-15", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d)", "PC Act 1988 s.13(2)", "IPC 186", "IPC 201", "IPC 511", "IPC 224", "IPC 332", "IPC 353" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Police Post Shanti Nagar, P.S. Keshav Puram, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.08, "jev_p_culpable": 0.98, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "pending_appeal", "name_public": null, "display": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, Police Post Shanti Nagar, P.S. Keshav Puram, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Keshav Puram man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 3, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/176557525/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/20-years-after-granting-bail-delhi-high-court-upholds-conviction-of-cop-in-bribery-case" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed ASI 's appeal and sustained his CBI-trap conviction, withdrawing bail granted in 2001 and ordering him taken into custody forthwith. The court found that while investigating a kidnapping complaint against a Keshav Puram man, he demanded Rs 10,000 reduced to Rs 5,000 on 15 June 1996 threatening arrest even though the couple had married with family consent; he accepted the tainted notes, then assaulted CBI officers, smashed the hand-wash glass and fled to the police-post roof before recapture. The court held demand, acceptance and recovery proved by the shadow witness and trap party despite minor variations. The concurrent sentences under the PC Act and IPC provisions, with a maximum of 3 years simple imprisonment, were sustained. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed ASI 's appeal and sustained his CBI-trap conviction, withdrawing bail granted in 2001 and ordering him taken into custody forthwith. The court found that while investigating a kidnapping complaint against a Keshav Puram man, he demanded Rs 10,000 reduced to Rs 5,000 on 15 June 1996 threatening arrest even though the couple had married with family consent; he accepted the tainted notes, then assaulted CBI officers, smashed the hand-wash glass and fled to the police-post roof before recapture. The court held demand, acceptance and recovery proved by the shadow witness and trap party despite minor variations. The concurrent sentences under the PC Act and IPC provisions, with a maximum of 3 years simple imprisonment, were sustained.", "court_quote": "There is thus, no infirmity in the impugned judgment convicting the appellant for the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 7 & 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.", "court_quote_para": "77", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC dismissed appeal, sustained PC Act + IPC convictions; withdrew 2001 bail, custody forthwith.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "AIRONLINE 2021 DEL 1636", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2021-09-15", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "AIRONLINE 2021 DEL 1636", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2021-10-25", "action_type": "Appeal pending", "status": "Pending", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "As of 25 October 2021, an appeal arising from this judgment was pending before the Supreme Court of India (officers: [name withheld]); the judgment's findings had not been set aside on that date.", "disposition": "Later proceeding · Appeal pending", "source": "https://order.law/api/pdf/SCIN010237932021?order=4r4wi", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." } ], "later_proceedings": [ { "court": "Supreme Court of India", "date": "2021-10-25", "url": "https://order.law/api/pdf/SCIN010237932021?order=4r4wi", "outcome": "pending_appeal" } ], "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/176557525/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/20-years-after-granting-bail-delhi-high-court-upholds-conviction-of-cop-in-bribery-case", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-15", "chunk-r09" ], "merged_case_id": "SWBRIBER-006", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2021-0022", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0795", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Resident v. [name withheld] (DCP) & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Resident v. [name withheld] (DCP) & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North West", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Maurya Enclave", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Resident v. [name withheld] (DCP) & Ors.", "case_number": "CONT.CAS(C) 480/2020 & CM APPL. 25054/2020", "citation": "2021 SCC OnLine Del 5574", "judges": [ "Najmi Waziri" ], "judgment_date": "2021-12-07", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2021, "incident_date": "2020-08-23", "incident_year": 2020, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory_display": "illegal detention false imprisonment", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_by_hc", "sections": [ "Contempt of Courts Act 1971", "CrPC s.41A", "IPC 406", "IPC 34" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "PS Maurya Enclave, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "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": "Sub-Inspector, PS Maurya Enclave, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 0.003, "compensation_inr": 15000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/1-rakesh-kumar-v-vijayanta-arya-7-dec-2021-412063.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/arrest-in-breach-of-arnesh-kumar-guidelines-delhi-high-court-sentences-police-officer-to-one-day-imprisonment-188694", "https://blog.scconline.gen.in/post/2022/01/05/arrest-incarceration-destroys-a-person-and-affects-innocent-relatives/", "https://sabrangindia.in/delhi-hc-sends-police-officer-prison-day-violating-arnesh-kumar-guidelines/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court held Delhi Police Sub-Inspector of PS Maurya Enclave guilty of criminal contempt for arresting petitioner [name withheld] on 23 August 2020 without serving Section 41A CrPC notice, in breach of the Supreme Court's Arnesh Kumar guidelines. The court found the arrest illegal since only Sections 406/34 IPC (maximum 3 years) were alleged, and the petitioner suffered 11 days incarceration before bail. The court rejected the officer's belated apology as showing no contrition and held his highhandedness violated the petitioner's Article 21 liberty. It sentenced him to one day simple imprisonment with Rs.2,000 fine and Rs.15,000 costs to the petitioner, keeping sentence in abeyance for two months to allow challenge. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court held Delhi Police Sub-Inspector of PS Maurya Enclave guilty of criminal contempt for arresting petitioner [name withheld] on 23 August 2020 without serving Section 41A CrPC notice, in breach of the Supreme Court's Arnesh Kumar guidelines. The court found the arrest illegal since only Sections 406/34 IPC (maximum 3 years) were alleged, and the petitioner suffered 11 days incarceration before bail. The court rejected the officer's belated apology as showing no contrition and held his highhandedness violated the petitioner's Article 21 liberty. It sentenced him to one day simple imprisonment with Rs.2,000 fine and Rs.15,000 costs to the petitioner, keeping sentence in abeyance for two months to allow challenge.", "court_quote": "The court has already held R-3 guilty of committing contempt of court. He arrested the petitioner in breach of directions passed by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar, Criminal Appeal No. 1277/2014.", "court_quote_para": "1", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC contempt conviction verified; SI sentenced to 1-day SI plus fine and costs for illegal arrest.", "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": "2021-12-07", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "2021 SCC OnLine Del 5574", "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.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/1-rakesh-kumar-v-vijayanta-arya-7-dec-2021-412063.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/arrest-in-breach-of-arnesh-kumar-guidelines-delhi-high-court-sentences-police-officer-to-one-day-imprisonment-188694", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://blog.scconline.gen.in/post/2022/01/05/arrest-incarceration-destroys-a-person-and-affects-innocent-relatives/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://sabrangindia.in/delhi-hc-sends-police-officer-prison-day-violating-arnesh-kumar-guidelines/", "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-60" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-20-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2022-0005", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0107", "alias_merged_ids": [ "CWC-1431" ], "display_title": "New Delhi Man vs Union of India", "display_title_redacted": "New Delhi Man vs Union of India", "state": "Delhi", "district": "New Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi (Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place)", "police_station_or_unit": "Inter-State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "New Delhi Man vs Union of India", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 6670/1998", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Prathiba M. Singh" ], "judgment_date": "2022-04-26", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2022, "incident_date": "1997-03-31", "incident_year": 1997, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "fake_encounter_extrajudicial_killing", "subcategory": "fake_encounter_extrajudicial_killing", "subcategory_display": "fake encounter extrajudicial killing", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Commissioner of Police", "role": "named_only", "unit": "Crime Branch, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no", "key2_union:unclear", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "unclear", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.81, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Assistant Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 10, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 1500000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/30945257/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/708584/", "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/cp-shootout-416165.pdf", "https://www.livelaw.in/amp/news-updates/delhi-high-court-compensation-victim-1997-cp-shootout-197848" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 15,00,000 with 8% simple interest from the incident date plus Rs 2,00,000 in litigation costs to a New Delhi man, the survivor of the Connaught Place fake encounter of 31 March 1997. Grievously injured while his two friends were killed, he lives with shrapnel in his body and a disabled right arm, and his testimony as the key prosecution witness had convicted the ten policemen. The Court held that injury caused by State action where police officials stand convicted of criminal offences must be compensated at a higher standard than negligence cases, and that the 25-year delay must favour the petitioner who lost the prime of his life. An ad-hoc Rs 1,00,000 paid in 1999 was ordered to be adjusted. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 15,00,000 with 8% simple interest from the incident date plus Rs 2,00,000 in litigation costs to a New Delhi man, the survivor of the Connaught Place fake encounter of 31 March 1997. Grievously injured while his two friends were killed, he lives with shrapnel in his body and a disabled right arm, and his testimony as the key prosecution witness had convicted the ten policemen. The Court held that injury caused by State action where police officials stand convicted of criminal offences must be compensated at a higher standard than negligence cases, and that the 25-year delay must favour the petitioner who lost the prime of his life. An ad-hoc Rs 1,00,000 paid in 1999 was ordered to be adjusted.", "court_quote": "Injury caused due to the state action and that too one, where the police officials were convicted of criminal offences and not some inaction or negligence, needs to be considered at higher standard as compared to those of ordinary cases of negligence and inaction.", "court_quote_para": "33", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Survivor awarded Rs 15L + interest + costs; verified from judgment text.", "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": "2022-04-26", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 1,500,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "W.P.(C) 6670/1998", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/30945257/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/708584/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/cp-shootout-416165.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/amp/news-updates/delhi-high-court-compensation-victim-1997-cp-shootout-197848", "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-27", "chunk-32", "chunk-40" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-016", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2022-0021", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0113", "alias_merged_ids": [ "CWC-1475" ], "display_title": "[name withheld] v. CP & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "[name withheld] v. CP & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS IGI Airport", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "[name withheld] v. CP & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 7245/2003", "citation": "2022/DHC/004763; 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 1073", "judges": [ "Satish Chandra Sharma", "Subramonium Prasad" ], "judgment_date": "2022-11-09", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2022, "incident_date": "1996-03-24", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory": "extortion", "subcategory_display": "extortion", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Delhi Police, IGI Airport Terminal 2", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Delhi Police, IGI Airport Terminal 2" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "role": "named_only", "unit": "Delhi Police, IGI Airport Terminal 2", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:named_only", "key2:no", "key2_agy:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "named_only", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.9, "jev_p_culpable": 0.1, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police, IGI Airport Terminal 2" } ], "officer_count": 2, "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.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/59909112022cw72452003124048-443754.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/policeman-caught-with-75-dirhams-at-airport-delhi-high-court-upholds-dismissal-213900", "https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/delhi-high-court-upholds-dismissal-police-constable-caught-taking-money-passengers-airport", "https://www.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/59909112022cw72452003124048-1436730.pdf" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Head Constable and ASI of Delhi Police were on passport-checking duty at Terminal 2, IGI Airport, on the night of 23/24 March 1996 when a surprise check by the DCP led to the recovery of 75 Dirhams from Kumar's pocket. The court noted that questioned passengers confirmed police officials at the gate were extorting and taking money, and a joint departmental enquiry resulted in both officers being dismissed from service on 20 September 1999. The court held that recovery of foreign currency from a non-traveller policeman plus witness statements clearly established corrupt misconduct, rejecting the plea that it was a case of no evidence. Finding no procedural irregularity or violation of natural justice, the Division Bench upheld the dismissal orders of the Disciplinary Authority, the Commissioner of Police (appellate order, 2002) and the CAT, and dismissed the writ petition. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Head Constable and ASI of Delhi Police were on passport-checking duty at Terminal 2, IGI Airport, on the night of 23/24 March 1996 when a surprise check by the DCP led to the recovery of 75 Dirhams from Kumar's pocket. The court noted that questioned passengers confirmed police officials at the gate were extorting and taking money, and a joint departmental enquiry resulted in both officers being dismissed from service on 20 September 1999. The court held that recovery of foreign currency from a non-traveller policeman plus witness statements clearly established corrupt misconduct, rejecting the plea that it was a case of no evidence. Finding no procedural irregularity or violation of natural justice, the Division Bench upheld the dismissal orders of the Disciplinary Authority, the Commissioner of Police (appellate order, 2002) and the CAT, and dismissed the writ petition.", "court_quote": "In light of the aforesaid judgments and in absence of any procedural irregularity or violation of principle of natural justice and fair play, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority, the Appellate Authority as well as the order passed by the CAT.", "court_quote_para": "28", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC Division Bench dismissed writ; 1999 dismissal of 2 Delhi Police officers for extorting money from IGI passengers upheld (recategorised misconduct/other to corruption/extortion per charge memo).", "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": "2022-11-09", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "2022/DHC/004763; 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 1073", "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.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/59909112022cw72452003124048-443754.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/policeman-caught-with-75-dirhams-at-airport-delhi-high-court-upholds-dismissal-213900", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/delhi-high-court-upholds-dismissal-police-constable-caught-taking-money-passengers-airport", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/59909112022cw72452003124048-1436730.pdf", "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-28", "chunk-33", "chunk-34" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-022", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2023-0047", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0914", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable v. State of NCT, Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable v. State of NCT, Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "I.P. Estate Police Station", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable v. State of NCT, Delhi", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 2390 of 2010", "citation": "2023 INSC 622; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 539", "judges": [ "Abhay S. Oka", "Rajesh Bindal" ], "judgment_date": "2023-07-17", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2023, "incident_date": "1994-12-28", "incident_year": 1994, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_by_sc", "sections": [ "IPC 304A" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Delhi Police, I.P. Estate Police Station", "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, Delhi Police, I.P. Estate Police Station" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/539-arvind-kumar-v-state-nct-of-delhi-17-jul-2023-482021.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/186731186/", "https://www.livelaw.in/amp/supreme-court/supreme-court-modifies-conviction-death-accidental-firing-pistol-safety-position-233101" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. On 28 December 1994 guard constable, carrying an SAF carbine at I.P. Estate Police Station, went to stop fellow constable from long use of the official telephone, and during a scuffle the carbine entangled in his belt chain and five rounds discharged into the deceased neck, killing him. A Section 304A case was first registered, but after the deceased father complaint the Crime Branch chargesheeted murder, and the trial court and Delhi High Court convicted under Section 302 IPC with life sentence. The Supreme Court disbelieved the alleged motive, accepted the eyewitness account of accidental discharge, and held none of the Section 299 culpable-homicide ingredients proved. It set aside the murder conviction but held the failure to keep the change lever on safety was gross negligence causing death, substituting a Section 304A conviction treated as already undergone after over eight years served. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "On 28 December 1994 guard constable, carrying an SAF carbine at I.P. Estate Police Station, went to stop fellow constable from long use of the official telephone, and during a scuffle the carbine entangled in his belt chain and five rounds discharged into the deceased neck, killing him. A Section 304A case was first registered, but after the deceased father complaint the Crime Branch chargesheeted murder, and the trial court and Delhi High Court convicted under Section 302 IPC with life sentence. The Supreme Court disbelieved the alleged motive, accepted the eyewitness account of accidental discharge, and held none of the Section 299 culpable-homicide ingredients proved. It set aside the murder conviction but held the failure to keep the change lever on safety was gross negligence causing death, substituting a Section 304A conviction treated as already undergone after over eight years served.", "court_quote": "The conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the IPC is set aside and he is held guilty of committing the offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC.", "court_quote_para": "21", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC set aside murder conviction but convicted constable under Section 304A for negligent service-weapon death.", "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": "2023-07-17", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "2023 INSC 622; 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 539", "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.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/539-arvind-kumar-v-state-nct-of-delhi-17-jul-2023-482021.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/186731186/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/amp/supreme-court/supreme-court-modifies-conviction-death-accidental-firing-pistol-safety-position-233101", "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": "GAP2-60-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2023-0019", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0126", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Ram Niwas vs Union of India & Ors.; Raj Singh vs Union of India & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Ram Niwas vs Union of India & Ors.; Raj Singh vs Union of India & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Tughlakabad", "police_station_or_unit": "Railway Protection Force, Tughlakabad railway station", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Ram Niwas vs Union of India & Ors.; Raj Singh vs Union of India & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 8139/2010 & W.P.(C) 8141/2010", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Suresh Kumar Kait", "Neena Bansal Krishna" ], "judgment_date": "2023-08-01", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2023, "incident_date": "1998-09-06", "incident_year": 1998, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.8", "PC Act 1988 s.13" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Ram Niwas", "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Railway Protection Force, Tughlakabad railway station", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_openrouter:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.09, "jev_p_culpable": 0.89, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Ram Niwas", "display": "Ram Niwas (Constable)" }, { "name": "Raj Singh", "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Railway Protection Force, Tughlakabad railway station", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear(overruled by grok)", "key2_openrouter:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.1, "jev_p_culpable": 0.86, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Raj Singh", "display": "Raj Singh (Constable)" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Tughlakabad resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "railway", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/78613085/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petitions of two RPF constables posted at Tughlakabad railway station and sustained their removal from service for bribery. The Court noted they were caught in a Delhi ACB trap on 6 September 1998 accepting Rs 8,000 from complainant [name withheld] (FIR 35/98) and were removed after an RPF departmental enquiry in 2003, affirmed on appeal and review. Though a Special Judge acquitted them in the criminal trial in 2010, the Court held the acquittal was a benefit-of-doubt one giving no clean chit. It ruled that a dismissal founded on independent departmental findings on preponderance of probabilities cannot be undone by such an acquittal. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petitions of two RPF constables posted at Tughlakabad railway station and sustained their removal from service for bribery. The Court noted they were caught in a Delhi ACB trap on 6 September 1998 accepting Rs 8,000 from complainant [name withheld] (FIR 35/98) and were removed after an RPF departmental enquiry in 2003, affirmed on appeal and review. Though a Special Judge acquitted them in the criminal trial in 2010, the Court held the acquittal was a benefit-of-doubt one giving no clean chit. It ruled that a dismissal founded on independent departmental findings on preponderance of probabilities cannot be undone by such an acquittal.", "court_quote": "The acquittal of delinquent in a criminal case cannot by itself result in reinstatement in service of the petitioner who had been punished in the Departmental proceedings with a dismissal.", "court_quote_para": "19", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment text verified on Indian Kanoon; both writs dismissed, RPF removals 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": "2023-08-01", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) 8139/2010 & W.P.(C) 8141/2010", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/78613085/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-37" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-035", "officers_named_public": 2, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2023-0020", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0578", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "State Delhi Woman & Anr.", "display_title_redacted": "State Delhi Woman & Anr.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Shahdara", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Mansarovar Park (FIR 103/2014)", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "State Delhi Woman & Anr.", "case_number": "CRL.A. No. 229/2023", "citation": "2023:DHC:5910-DB; 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 725", "judges": [ "Suresh Kumar Kait", "Neena Bansal Krishna" ], "judgment_date": "2023-08-01", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2023, "incident_date": "2014-02-19", "incident_year": 2014, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "false_implication_fabrication", "subcategory": "false_implication_fabrication", "subcategory_display": "false implication fabrication", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "IPC 302", "IPC 120B", "JJ Act 2000 s.23" ], "officers": [], "officer_count": 0, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "female", "descriptor": "Delhi woman" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 2, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 100000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/judgementphp-488050.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-delhi-police-investigation-unfair-compensate-murder-accused-infant-death-235845", "https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/high-courts/murder-case-of-two-year-old-grandmother-father-accused-delhi-hc-grants-compensation-1491127" ], "summary": "After a 2-year-old's death in February 2014, Delhi Police (FIR 103/2014, PS Mansarovar Park) charged the paternal grandmother a Delhi woman and father [name withheld] with murder and cruelty; the trial court acquitted them of murder but convicted them under s.23 of the JJ Act 2000 (6 months, already undergone), which they were too poor to appeal. The Delhi High Court disposed of the State's appeal against the murder acquittal, holding the investigation terrible and unfair: a fall was never excluded, the rod/stick recovery was not exclusive knowledge, the father was at work, and the child's 5 kg weight showed chronic neglect rather than the alleged starvation. It set aside the JJ Act conviction in the interest of justice, awarded Rs.50,000 each at the cost of the prosecution, and cautioned prosecution agencies against casual appeals.", "summary_verified": "After a 2-year-old's death in February 2014, Delhi Police (FIR 103/2014, PS Mansarovar Park) charged the paternal grandmother a Delhi woman and father [name withheld] with murder and cruelty; the trial court acquitted them of murder but convicted them under s.23 of the JJ Act 2000 (6 months, already undergone), which they were too poor to appeal. The Delhi High Court disposed of the State's appeal against the murder acquittal, holding the investigation terrible and unfair: a fall was never excluded, the rod/stick recovery was not exclusive knowledge, the father was at work, and the child's 5 kg weight showed chronic neglect rather than the alleged starvation. It set aside the JJ Act conviction in the interest of justice, awarded Rs.50,000 each at the cost of the prosecution, and cautioned prosecution agencies against casual appeals.", "court_quote": "The present case is a classic example of terrible investigation at the hands of investigating agency of the prosecution, where despite lacking material substance against the respondents/accused, the prosecution floated the trial.", "court_quote_para": "24", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC held terrible/unfair police investigation, set aside JJ Act conviction, awarded Rs.50k each.", "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": "2023-08-01", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 100,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "2023:DHC:5910-DB; 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 725", "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.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/judgementphp-488050.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-delhi-police-investigation-unfair-compensate-murder-accused-infant-death-235845", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/high-courts/murder-case-of-two-year-old-grandmother-father-accused-delhi-hc-grants-compensation-1491127", "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-41" ], "merged_case_id": "SWFALSEI-008", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2023-0029", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0117", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Badarpur Man vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Badarpur Man vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South-East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Badarpur", "police_station_or_unit": "P.S. Badarpur", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Badarpur Man vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 3851/2023", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Subramonium Prasad" ], "judgment_date": "2023-10-05", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2023, "incident_date": "2022-09-02", "incident_year": 2022, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory_display": "illegal detention false imprisonment", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "P.S. Badarpur", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.09, "jev_p_culpable": 0.88, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, P.S. Badarpur" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "P.S. Badarpur", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.09, "jev_p_culpable": 0.9, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, P.S. Badarpur" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Badarpur man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 50000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/3701179/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-delhi-police-compensation-man-illegal-detention-police-lockup-arrest-239438" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 50,000 for a half-hour illegal detention, recoverable from the salaries of two Badarpur Sub-Inspectors. Responding to a DD complaint on 2 September 2022, SI brought the petitioner, against whom there was no FIR, to the station, where SI placed him in the lock-up from 11:01 to 11:24 PM without any formal arrest, FIR or DD entry; the petitioner's complaint to the Commissioner drew no action, and the State did not dispute these facts. The Court held the officers acted high-handedly, that even brief lock-up detention without procedure violates Article 21, and that a career-neutral censure would not deter such conduct. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court awarded Rs 50,000 for a half-hour illegal detention, recoverable from the salaries of two Badarpur Sub-Inspectors. Responding to a DD complaint on 2 September 2022, SI brought the petitioner, against whom there was no FIR, to the station, where SI placed him in the lock-up from 11:01 to 11:24 PM without any formal arrest, FIR or DD entry; the petitioner's complaint to the Commissioner drew no action, and the State did not dispute these facts. The Court held the officers acted high-handedly, that even brief lock-up detention without procedure violates Article 21, and that a career-neutral censure would not deter such conduct.", "court_quote": "A meaningful message must be sent to the authorities that police officers cannot be law unto themselves.", "court_quote_para": "14", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; half-hour illegal lock-up detention, Rs 50,000 from SIs' salaries.", "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": "2023-10-05", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 50,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "W.P.(C) 3851/2023", "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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/3701179/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-delhi-police-compensation-man-illegal-detention-police-lockup-arrest-239438", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-28" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-026", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2023-0054", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0955", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "South East Delhi Man vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "display_title_redacted": "South East Delhi Man vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Badarpur", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "South East Delhi Man vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "case_number": null, "citation": "2023 SCC OnLine Del 6215", "judges": [ "Subramonium Prasad" ], "judgment_date": "2023-10-05", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2023, "incident_date": "2022-09-02", "incident_year": 2022, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory_display": "illegal detention false imprisonment", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "Constitution Art. 21" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Police Station Badarpur, Delhi Police", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Police Station Badarpur, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Police Station Badarpur, Delhi Police", "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": "Sub-Inspector, Police Station Badarpur, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "South East Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 50000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/judgementphp-4-496559.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-delhi-police-compensation-man-illegal-detention-police-lockup-arrest-239438", "https://www.barandbench.com/news/delhi-high-court-orders-two-police-officers-pay-50k-compensation-illegally-detaining-man-half-hour" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Justice Subramonium Prasad) held the 2 September 2022 lock-up detention of a South East Delhi man at Badarpur police station for about 23 minutes without formal arrest, FIR or DD entry high-handed and violative of Article 21 and D.K. Basu. SI picked him up from a stabbing spot and SI placed him in the lock-up for no rhyme or reason. Holding the earlier departmental censure an insufficient deterrent and that police cannot be a law unto themselves, the Court awarded Rs 50,000 compensation recoverable from the two officers' salaries. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Justice Subramonium Prasad) held the 2 September 2022 lock-up detention of a South East Delhi man at Badarpur police station for about 23 minutes without formal arrest, FIR or DD entry high-handed and violative of Article 21 and D.K. Basu. SI picked him up from a stabbing spot and SI placed him in the lock-up for no rhyme or reason. Holding the earlier departmental censure an insufficient deterrent and that police cannot be a law unto themselves, the Court awarded Rs 50,000 compensation recoverable from the two officers' salaries.", "court_quote": "He was simply picked up from the spot, brought to the Police Station and placed inside the lock-up for no rhyme or reason.", "court_quote_para": "10", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC awarded Rs 50k for 23-min illegal lock-up detention; recovery from 2 SIs' salaries.", "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": "2023-10-05", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 50,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "2023 SCC OnLine Del 6215", "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.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/judgementphp-4-496559.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-delhi-police-compensation-man-illegal-detention-police-lockup-arrest-239438", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.barandbench.com/news/delhi-high-court-orders-two-police-officers-pay-50k-compensation-illegally-detaining-man-half-hour", "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-33" ], "merged_case_id": "SWILLEGA-006", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2024-0025", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0721", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "New Delhi Man v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "display_title_redacted": "New Delhi Man v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Badarpur, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "New Delhi Man v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 3851/2023", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Subramonium Prasad" ], "judgment_date": "2024-03-12", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2024, "incident_date": "2022-09-02", "incident_year": 2022, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory_display": "illegal detention false imprisonment", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "named_only", "unit": "PS Badarpur, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no", "key2_agy:no" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.64, "jev_p_culpable": 0.57, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, PS Badarpur, Delhi Police" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "named_only", "unit": "PS Badarpur, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no", "key2_agy:no" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": "no", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": null, "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.28, "jev_p_culpable": 0.74, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, PS Badarpur, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 50000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/193126214/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/3701179/", "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-delhi-police-compensation-man-illegal-detention-police-lockup-arrest-239438" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court (Justice Subramonium Prasad) directed Delhi Police to pay Rs 50,000 to vegetable vendor a New Delhi man, who was picked up on a knife-attack complaint (DD No.85A) on 2 September 2022 and kept in the PS Badarpur lockup from 11:01 to 11:24 p.m. without any formal arrest, FIR or DD entry. Liability had been found in the 5 October 2023 judgment; the 12 March 2024 order holds that even half an hour's detention without due procedure violates liberty, that a mere censure is no deterrent, and orders a proper inquiry to fix responsibility and recover the sum from the officer concerned. Both SIs had been censured departmentally; respondent 4's appeal against the DCP's censure order was pending.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court (Justice Subramonium Prasad) directed Delhi Police to pay Rs 50,000 to vegetable vendor a New Delhi man, who was picked up on a knife-attack complaint (DD No.85A) on 2 September 2022 and kept in the PS Badarpur lockup from 11:01 to 11:24 p.m. without any formal arrest, FIR or DD entry. Liability had been found in the 5 October 2023 judgment; the 12 March 2024 order holds that even half an hour's detention without due procedure violates liberty, that a mere censure is no deterrent, and orders a proper inquiry to fix responsibility and recover the sum from the officer concerned. Both SIs had been censured departmentally; respondent 4's appeal against the DCP's censure order was pending.", "court_quote": "The time spent in the lock-up by the Petitioner, even for a short while, cannot absolve the police officers who have deprived the Petitioners of his liberty without following the due procedure established by law.", "court_quote_para": "17", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC 12.03.2024 order verified on Indian Kanoon; Rs 50,000 for half-hour lockup detention + recovery matches.", "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": "2024-03-12", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 50,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "W.P.(C) 3851/2023", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/193126214/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/3701179/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-delhi-police-compensation-man-illegal-detention-police-lockup-arrest-239438", "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-53" ], "merged_case_id": "SWILLEGA-069", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2024-0011", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0648", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable v. State (NCT of Delhi)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable v. State (NCT of Delhi)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Mayur Vihar", "police_station_or_unit": "Mayur Vihar Police Station", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable v. State (NCT of Delhi)", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 597 of 2012", "citation": "2024 INSC 462", "judges": [ "Sudhanshu Dhulia", "Rajesh Bindal" ], "judgment_date": "2024-07-03", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2024, "incident_date": "2002-06-30", "incident_year": 2002, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 302", "IPC 307" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Delhi Police (guard, Mayur Vihar Police Station)", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.95, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Delhi Police (guard, Mayur Vihar Police Station)" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Mayur Vihar man" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "female", "descriptor": "Mayur Vihar woman" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 2, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://lawbeat.in/top-stories/man-killed-inside-police-station-supreme-court-upholds-conviction-constable", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/supreme-court/surender-singh-v-state-nct-of-delhi-2024-insc-462-police-guard-murder-conviction-uphel-1542714", "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/6687e6f51db9582ee8e43f27" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. On 30 June 2002, Delhi Police constable, posted as guard at Mayur Vihar Police Station, sprayed carbine fire inside the station while on duty, killing his relative a Mayur Vihar man over a personal motive and injuring a lady head constable. Convicted under Sections 302 and 307 IPC, he lost his appeal before the Delhi High Court in 2011. The Supreme Court termed it a brazen murder, rejected pleas of self-defence and grave-and-sudden provocation, dismissed the appeal and upheld the life sentence.", "summary_verified": "On 30 June 2002, Delhi Police constable, posted as guard at Mayur Vihar Police Station, sprayed carbine fire inside the station while on duty, killing his relative a Mayur Vihar man over a personal motive and injuring a lady head constable. Convicted under Sections 302 and 307 IPC, he lost his appeal before the Delhi High Court in 2011. The Supreme Court termed it a brazen murder, rejected pleas of self-defence and grave-and-sudden provocation, dismissed the appeal and upheld the life sentence.", "court_quote": "By no stretch of logic is it a case of any lesser magnitude, and definitely not culpable homicide not amounting to murder.", "court_quote_para": "25", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC murder-conviction ruling verified via 3+ independent reports; life sentence of on-duty constable upheld.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "2024 INSC 462", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2024-07-03", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "2024 INSC 462", "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://lawbeat.in/top-stories/man-killed-inside-police-station-supreme-court-upholds-conviction-constable", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/supreme-court/surender-singh-v-state-nct-of-delhi-2024-insc-462-police-guard-murder-conviction-uphel-1542714", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/6687e6f51db9582ee8e43f27", "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-45" ], "merged_case_id": "SWOTHERM-012", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2025-0074", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1374", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Man v. State (W.P.(C) 3476/2013)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Man v. State (W.P.(C) 3476/2013)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": "Tihar Jail", "court": "High Court of Delhi", "court_as_verified": "High Court of Delhi", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Man v. State (W.P.(C) 3476/2013)", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 3476/2013", "citation": "2025:DHC:XXXX", "judges": [ "Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar" ], "judgment_date": "2025-06-12", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2025, "incident_date": "2013-05-03", "incident_year": 2013, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [ "357A CrPC", "Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme 2018", "Article 21" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Jail Officials", "role": "named_in_finding", "unit": "Tihar Jail", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "name_public": null, "display": "Jail Officials, Tihar Jail" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 300000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/68012062025CW34762013_211156.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://lawyerenews.com/legal_detail/custodial-death-right-to-compensation-flows-from-article-21-irrespective-of-conviction-or-acquittal-delhi-high-court" ], "summary": "The High Court awarded compensation for the custodial death of an undertrial prisoner killed in a gang fight in Tihar Jail, holding that the State's duty to protect prisoners' lives under Article 21 is absolute. The Court expanded the definition of 'dependents' under the Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme to include siblings and grandchildren, ruling that marital status of daughters does not affect entitlement. The Court directed immediate payment of ₹2 lakh (difference from NHRC's interim ₹1 lakh) and ordered DSLSA to determine further compensation up to ₹10 lakh.", "summary_verified": "The High Court awarded compensation for the custodial death of an undertrial prisoner killed in a gang fight in Tihar Jail, holding that the State's duty to protect prisoners' lives under Article 21 is absolute. The Court expanded the definition of 'dependents' under the Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme to include siblings and grandchildren, ruling that marital status of daughters does not affect entitlement. The Court directed immediate payment of ₹2 lakh (difference from NHRC's interim ₹1 lakh) and ordered DSLSA to determine further compensation up to ₹10 lakh.", "court_quote": "A prisoner, whether convict or undertrial, retains all his fundamental rights, including the right to life under Article 21. The State cannot abdicate its responsibility merely because the deceased had criminal antecedents. Compensation for custodial death is not charity, it is a constitutional right.", "court_quote_para": "18", "confidence": "medium", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Judge is wrong: the judgment was delivered by Hon'ble Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, not [name withheld].; court_quote (para 18) could not be verified verbatim: confirmed phrases include 'it is the bounden duty of the State to ensure the safety of persons who are in its custody' and Article 21 propositions, but the exact sentence 'Compensation for custodial death is not charity, it is a constitutional right' was not confirmed in the extract.; Rest verified: W.P.(C) 3476/2013, decision 12-06-2025, petitioner [name withheld] (mother, later substituted by legal representatives), deceased [name withheld] who died 03-05-2013 in Tihar Jail, NHRC interim Rs 1 lakh already paid, DVCS 2018 range Rs 3-10 lakh, dependents include siblings/grandchildren, State vicariously liable.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2025-06-12", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "High Court of Delhi", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The High Court of Delhi recorded adverse findings against police personnel.", "disposition": "adverse finding compensation", "source": "2025:DHC:XXXX", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." } ], "later_proceedings": [], "final_outcome_url": null, "followup_history": [ { "date": "2026-09-24", "scope": "Swarm scout and independent verification pass (Muse Spark)." } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-24", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/68012062025CW34762013_211156.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://lawyerenews.com/legal_detail/custodial-death-right-to-compensation-flows-from-article-21-irrespective-of-conviction-or-acquittal-delhi-high-court", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "swarm-verify-cop-dl-hc" ], "merged_case_id": "cop-dl-hc-7", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2025-0019", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0125", "alias_merged_ids": [ "CWC-1424" ], "display_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector v. State (Delhi Police personnel v. State)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector v. State (Delhi Police personnel v. State)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Khichripur", "police_station_or_unit": "Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector v. State (Delhi Police personnel v. State)", "case_number": "CRL.A. 315/2021 with CRL.A. 319/2021", "citation": "2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1576", "judges": [ "Neena Bansal Krishna" ], "judgment_date": "2025-09-26", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2025, "incident_date": "2017-08-27", "incident_year": 2017, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.12" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.41, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "pending_appeal", "name_public": null, "display": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 0, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 3, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/nbk26092025crla3152021143115-632662.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/high-court-upholds-delhi-police-personnels-conviction-for-offering-50k-bribe-to-judge-acquits-two-310984", "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/nbk26092025crla3152021143115-632674.pdf" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of ASI under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act by the Special Judge (Complaint Case 183/2019), while acquitting him under Section 120B IPC and acquitting co-appellants Mukul Kumar and [name withheld] entirely. The Court found proved beyond reasonable doubt that on 27 August 2017 [name withheld] handed an envelope containing Rs. 50,000 with a copy of Mukul Kumar's interview letter to the complainant Additional Sessions Judge, a member of the peon-selection committee, to secure favour in the next day's interview, and the ACB seized the packet. It applied the presumption on motive and held the overt act of offering a bribe established. The upheld sentence is three years' rigorous imprisonment with a Rs. 50,000 fine under Section 12. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of ASI under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act by the Special Judge (Complaint Case 183/2019), while acquitting him under Section 120B IPC and acquitting co-appellants Mukul Kumar and [name withheld] entirely. The Court found proved beyond reasonable doubt that on 27 August 2017 [name withheld] handed an envelope containing Rs. 50,000 with a copy of Mukul Kumar's interview letter to the complainant Additional Sessions Judge, a member of the peon-selection committee, to secure favour in the next day's interview, and the ACB seized the packet. It applied the presumption on motive and held the overt act of offering a bribe established. The upheld sentence is three years' rigorous imprisonment with a Rs. 50,000 fine under Section 12.", "court_quote": "The conviction of [name withheld] is upheld under S.12 PC Act, while he is acquitted for the offence under S.120 B IPC.", "court_quote_para": "155", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment PDF verified; ASI's s.12 PC Act conviction (bribe to judge) upheld, co-accused acquitted.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1576", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2025-09-26", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1576", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-01-27", "action_type": "Appeal pending", "status": "Pending", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "As of 27 January 2026, an appeal arising from this judgment was pending before the Supreme Court of India (officers: [name withheld]); the judgment's findings had not been set aside on that date.", "disposition": "Later proceeding · Appeal pending", "source": "https://api.sci.gov.in/jonew/cl/2026-01-27/M_C_1.pdf", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-04-10", "action_type": "Appeal pending", "status": "Pending", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "As of 10 April 2026, an appeal arising from this judgment was pending before the Supreme Court of India (officers: [name withheld]); the judgment's findings had not been set aside on that date.", "disposition": "Later proceeding · Appeal pending", "source": "https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2025/75475/75475_2025_7_44_69992_Order_10-Apr-2026.pdf", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." } ], "later_proceedings": [ { "court": "Supreme Court of India", "date": "2026-01-27", "url": "https://api.sci.gov.in/jonew/cl/2026-01-27/M_C_1.pdf", "outcome": "pending_appeal" }, { "court": "Supreme Court of India", "date": "2026-04-10", "url": "https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2025/75475/75475_2025_7_44_69992_Order_10-Apr-2026.pdf", "outcome": "pending_appeal" } ], "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote", "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/nbk26092025crla3152021143115-632662.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/high-court-upholds-delhi-police-personnels-conviction-for-offering-50k-bribe-to-judge-acquits-two-310984", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/nbk26092025crla3152021143115-632674.pdf", "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-31", "chunk-36", "chunk-38" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-034", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2025-0027", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0645", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Commissioner of Police & Ors. v. Delhi Police Constable", "display_title_redacted": "Commissioner of Police & Ors. v. Delhi Police Constable", "state": "Delhi", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Commissioner of Police & Ors. v. Delhi Police Constable", "case_number": "Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 24705 of 2023", "citation": "2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1117", "judges": [ "Ahsanuddin Amanullah", "Prashant Kumar Mishra" ], "judgment_date": "2025-11-12", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2025, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": 1988, "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": "Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.1, "jev_p_culpable": 0.92, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Delhi Police" } ], "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.livelaw.in/supreme-court/getting-appointment-based-on-forged-degree-certificate-is-uncondonable-supreme-court-310353", "secondary_sources": [ "https://lawstreet.co/judiciary/appointment-obtained-on-forged-educational-certificate-is-uncondonable-no-full-departmental-inquiry-needed-sc", "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/3991120232025-11-12-631341.pdf" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. [name withheld] was appointed a Delhi Police constable in 1988, but a 1996 complaint revealed the appointment rested on a forged degree certificate, leading to his dismissal in 1997 without a full-fledged inquiry. The courts below interfered with the dismissal and remanded the matter for a full departmental inquiry. The Supreme Court held that appointment in the uniformed police service on a forged certificate is uncondonable, the forgery stood wholly unrebutted, and no full inquiry was needed; the appeal was allowed and the dismissal restored.", "summary_verified": "[name withheld] was appointed a Delhi Police constable in 1988, but a 1996 complaint revealed the appointment rested on a forged degree certificate, leading to his dismissal in 1997 without a full-fledged inquiry. The courts below interfered with the dismissal and remanded the matter for a full departmental inquiry. The Supreme Court held that appointment in the uniformed police service on a forged certificate is uncondonable, the forgery stood wholly unrebutted, and no full inquiry was needed; the appeal was allowed and the dismissal restored.", "court_quote": "The fact that once on the basis of a forged degree/certificate, a person gets appointment in the uniformed service of the country, that being the police, which is supposed to uphold the rule of law, the act of the respondent is uncondonable.", "court_quote_para": "8", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC judgment verified via LiveLaw report and judgment PDF; dismissal for forged-certificate appointment restored.", "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": "2025-11-12", "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 LiveLaw (SC) 1117", "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.livelaw.in/supreme-court/getting-appointment-based-on-forged-degree-certificate-is-uncondonable-supreme-court-310353", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://lawstreet.co/judiciary/appointment-obtained-on-forged-educational-certificate-is-uncondonable-no-full-departmental-inquiry-needed-sc", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/3991120232025-11-12-631341.pdf", "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-45" ], "merged_case_id": "SWOTHERM-009", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0006", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0102", "alias_merged_ids": [ "CWC-0507" ], "display_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector v. CBI", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector v. CBI", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Shakur Basti", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Post Shakur Basti", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector v. CBI", "case_number": "CRL.A. 567/2001", "citation": "2026 LiveLaw (Del) 118", "judges": [ "Chandrasekharan Sudha" ], "judgment_date": "2026-01-28", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "1995-11-08", "incident_year": 1995, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Police Post Shakur Basti, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.1, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "pending_appeal", "name_public": null, "display": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, Police Post Shakur Basti, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Shakur Basti resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 2.5, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/76028012026crla5672001114115-650055.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/30-years-on-delhi-high-court-upholds-conviction-police-asi-accepting-5000-bribe-521029", "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/26629746/", "https://news.webindia123.com/news/Articles/India/20260129/4410256.html" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed ASI 's appeal and upheld his conviction by the Special Judge, Tis Hazari (C.C. No. 72/99) under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Court found that while posted at Police Post Shakur Basti, he demanded Rs. 10,000 on 8 November 1995 for not harassing the complainant over complaints by the latter's brother, and received Rs. 5,000 on 9 November 1995 in a CBI trap. It held demand and acceptance proved despite partially hostile panch witnesses and the nearly 30-year delay, and upheld the sanction granted by the DCP (North-West). The Court confirmed two-and-a-half years' rigorous imprisonment with fine under Section 7 and one-and-a-half years under Section 13, concurrently, acquitting him only of the Section 384 IPC charge. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed ASI 's appeal and upheld his conviction by the Special Judge, Tis Hazari (C.C. No. 72/99) under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Court found that while posted at Police Post Shakur Basti, he demanded Rs. 10,000 on 8 November 1995 for not harassing the complainant over complaints by the latter's brother, and received Rs. 5,000 on 9 November 1995 in a CBI trap. It held demand and acceptance proved despite partially hostile panch witnesses and the nearly 30-year delay, and upheld the sanction granted by the DCP (North-West). The Court confirmed two-and-a-half years' rigorous imprisonment with fine under Section 7 and one-and-a-half years under Section 13, concurrently, acquitting him only of the Section 384 IPC charge.", "court_quote": "There is no infirmity in the impugned order relating to the guilt of the accused for the offences charged against him and hence, I do not find any grounds calling for an interference into the same. The appeal, sans merit, is thus dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "41-42", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment PDF verified; ASI's ss.7/13 PC Act conviction and sentence upheld.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "2026 LiveLaw (Del) 118", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-01-28", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "2026 LiveLaw (Del) 118", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-04-10", "action_type": "Appeal pending", "status": "Pending", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "As of 10 April 2026, an appeal arising from this judgment was pending before the Supreme Court of India (officers: Unnamed personnel); the judgment's findings had not been set aside on that date.", "disposition": "Later proceeding · Appeal pending", "source": "https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2026/16342/16342_2026_12_27_70004_Order_10-Apr-2026.pdf", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-06-29", "action_type": "Appeal pending", "status": "Pending", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "As of 29 June 2026, an appeal arising from this judgment was pending before the Supreme Court of India (officers: [name withheld]); the judgment's findings had not been set aside on that date.", "disposition": "Later proceeding · Appeal pending", "source": "https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2026/16342/16342_2026_4_1_71788_Order_29-Jun-2026.pdf", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." } ], "later_proceedings": [ { "court": "Supreme Court of India", "date": "2026-04-10", "url": "https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2026/16342/16342_2026_12_27_70004_Order_10-Apr-2026.pdf", "outcome": "pending_appeal" }, { "court": "Supreme Court of India", "date": "2026-06-29", "url": "https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2026/16342/16342_2026_4_1_71788_Order_29-Jun-2026.pdf", "outcome": "pending_appeal" } ], "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.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/76028012026crla5672001114115-650055.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/30-years-on-delhi-high-court-upholds-conviction-police-asi-accepting-5000-bribe-521029", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/26629746/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://news.webindia123.com/news/Articles/India/20260129/4410256.html", "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-15", "chunk-31", "chunk-38", "chunk-r09" ], "merged_case_id": "SWBRIBER-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0044", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0796", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector v. State (CBI)", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector v. State (CBI)", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North West", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Ashok Vihar", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector v. State (CBI)", "case_number": "CRL.A. 582/2003", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Chandrasekharan Sudha" ], "judgment_date": "2026-01-29", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "1996-04-23", "incident_year": 1996, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "PS Ashok Vihar, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "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": "Sub-Inspector, PS Ashok Vihar, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": null, "name": null, "descriptor": "Delhi resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 1, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/76029012026CRLA5822003_154348.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://askjunior.substack.com/p/daily-judgments-of-30-january-535" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector of PS Ashok Vihar and sustained his Tis Hazari conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs.2,000 bribe in Crime No.204/96, caught in a CBI trap on 23 April 1996. The court relied on the independent witness account of marked currency falling from upstairs and the pink phenolphthalein hand-wash test, holding there was no material to doubt the prosecution case. It held the complainant's other complaints were no ground to disbelieve him and that investigation by an unauthorised officer did not vitiate the trial absent prejudice. The appellant died on 2 October 2022 so the substantive sentence (6 months plus 1 year SI with fines) stands abated under Section 394(2) CrPC, but the conviction was upheld on merits with fine surviving. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector of PS Ashok Vihar and sustained his Tis Hazari conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs.2,000 bribe in Crime No.204/96, caught in a CBI trap on 23 April 1996. The court relied on the independent witness account of marked currency falling from upstairs and the pink phenolphthalein hand-wash test, holding there was no material to doubt the prosecution case. It held the complainant's other complaints were no ground to disbelieve him and that investigation by an unauthorised officer did not vitiate the trial absent prejudice. The appellant died on 2 October 2022 so the substantive sentence (6 months plus 1 year SI with fines) stands abated under Section 394(2) CrPC, but the conviction was upheld on merits with fine surviving.", "court_quote": "PW3 has clearly deposed that he had seen the currency notes falling down from upstairs and that he had picked up the same. PW3 also deposed that the hand wash of the accused had also turned pink when the same was dipped in the sodium carbonate solution. In such circumstances, I do not find any materials to doubt or discard the prosecution case.", "court_quote_para": "25", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified via official PDF; SI bribery conviction sustained on merits, sentence abated on death.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "CRL.A. 582/2003", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-01-29", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "CRL.A. 582/2003", "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://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/76029012026CRLA5822003_154348.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://askjunior.substack.com/p/daily-judgments-of-30-january-535", "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-60" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP2-20-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0008", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0101", "alias_merged_ids": [ "CWC-0508" ], "display_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector v. CBI", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector v. CBI", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Central Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Jama Masjid", "police_station_or_unit": "Jama Masjid Police Station", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector v. CBI", "case_number": "CRL.A. 733/2002", "citation": "2026 LiveLaw (Del) 140", "judges": [ "Chandrasekharan Sudha" ], "judgment_date": "2026-02-02", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "1995-09-25", "incident_year": 1995, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Jama Masjid Police Station, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.08, "jev_p_culpable": 0.95, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, Jama Masjid Police Station, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Jama Masjid resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 4, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/76002022026crla7332002105024-653740.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-upholds-conviction-of-police-sub-inspector-in-1995-cbi-bribery-trap-case-521774", "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/64677415/", "https://www.nationpress.com/all/delhi-cops-bribery-sentence-upheld" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed SI 's appeal and upheld his conviction by the Special Judge, Tis Hazari (C.C. No. 57/1996) under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Court found that while posted at Jama Masjid Police Station and investigating Crime No. 187/95, he demanded Rs. 5,000 on 25 September 1995 for not taking adverse action against the complainant, and the CBI recovered the bribe from a Head Constable acting at his instance in a trap at Tis Hazari Courts. It rejected defences based on witness contradictions, tape evidence and CBI Manual non-compliance, and upheld the sanction granted by the DCP (Central). The Court confirmed four years' rigorous imprisonment with fine under each provision. (The judgment labels the Act as 1947, an apparent error for the 1988 Act.). Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed SI 's appeal and upheld his conviction by the Special Judge, Tis Hazari (C.C. No. 57/1996) under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Court found that while posted at Jama Masjid Police Station and investigating Crime No. 187/95, he demanded Rs. 5,000 on 25 September 1995 for not taking adverse action against the complainant, and the CBI recovered the bribe from a Head Constable acting at his instance in a trap at Tis Hazari Courts. It rejected defences based on witness contradictions, tape evidence and CBI Manual non-compliance, and upheld the sanction granted by the DCP (Central). The Court confirmed four years' rigorous imprisonment with fine under each provision. (The judgment labels the Act as 1947, an apparent error for the 1988 Act.)", "court_quote": "In the light of the materials on record, I do not find any reason to disbelieve the prosecution case. Hence, I find no infirmity in the impugned judgement calling for an interference by this court.", "court_quote_para": "39", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment PDF verified; SI's ss.7/13 PC Act conviction and 4-yr sentence upheld.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "2026 LiveLaw (Del) 140", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-02-02", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "2026 LiveLaw (Del) 140", "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.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/76002022026crla7332002105024-653740.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-upholds-conviction-of-police-sub-inspector-in-1995-cbi-bribery-trap-case-521774", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/64677415/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.nationpress.com/all/delhi-cops-bribery-sentence-upheld", "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-15", "chunk-31", "chunk-38", "chunk-r09" ], "merged_case_id": "SWBRIBER-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0009", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0124", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Woman Constable (DD Writer) vs Govt. of NCT and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Woman Constable (DD Writer) vs Govt. of NCT and Others", "state": "Delhi", "district": "East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Ashok Nagar", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station New Ashok Nagar, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Woman Constable (DD Writer) vs Govt. of NCT and Others", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 8707/2009", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Anil Kshetarpal", "Amit Mahajan" ], "judgment_date": "2026-02-20", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "2005-09-06", "incident_year": 2005, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Woman Constable (DD Writer)", "unit": "Police Station New Ashok Nagar, Delhi Police", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.07, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Woman Constable (DD Writer), Police Station New Ashok Nagar, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "New Ashok Nagar man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://rawlaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/RAJNI.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://rawlaw.in/delhi-high-court-sting-operation-video-sufficient-in-departmental-inquiry-non-examination-of-decoy-not-fatal-woman-constables-dismissal-for-corruption-upheld/" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed Woman Constable's writ and upheld her dismissal for corruption caught in a TV sting. Posted as DD Writer at PS New Ashok Nagar, she demanded Rs 200 and accepted Rs 150 from decoy [name withheld] to register an NCR for a lost phone on 6 September 2005; the concealed-camera footage was telecast on Star News' Sansani programme. A joint departmental enquiry with Duty Officer HC relied on the video-CD plus duty records and departmental witnesses to hold her guilty. The Court held the sting video was cogent material, non-examination of the decoy not fatal, and concurrent findings of four fora neither perverse nor arbitrary. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed Woman Constable's writ and upheld her dismissal for corruption caught in a TV sting. Posted as DD Writer at PS New Ashok Nagar, she demanded Rs 200 and accepted Rs 150 from decoy [name withheld] to register an NCR for a lost phone on 6 September 2005; the concealed-camera footage was telecast on Star News' Sansani programme. A joint departmental enquiry with Duty Officer HC relied on the video-CD plus duty records and departmental witnesses to hold her guilty. The Court held the sting video was cogent material, non-examination of the decoy not fatal, and concurrent findings of four fora neither perverse nor arbitrary.", "court_quote": "This chain of concurrent factual determinations, based on oral, documentary and electronic material disclosed to the Petitioner, does not convince this Court that it is a case of no evidence or there has been a violation of natural justice.", "court_quote_para": "19", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Sting-video bribery dismissal upheld; decoy non-examination held not fatal.", "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": "2026-02-20", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "W.P.(C) 8707/2009", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote", "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://rawlaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/RAJNI.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://rawlaw.in/delhi-high-court-sting-operation-video-sufficient-in-departmental-inquiry-non-examination-of-decoy-not-fatal-woman-constables-dismissal-for-corruption-upheld/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-36" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-033", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0014", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0116", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Haji Mohd. Altaf vs State; [name withheld] vs State NCT of Delhi; Rajouri Garden Man (deceased) thr. LRs vs State", "display_title_redacted": "Haji Mohd. Altaf vs State; [name withheld] vs State NCT of Delhi; Rajouri Garden Man (deceased) thr. LRs vs State", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Rajouri Garden", "police_station_or_unit": "P.S. Rajouri Garden", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Haji Mohd. Altaf vs State; [name withheld] vs State NCT of Delhi; Rajouri Garden Man (deceased) thr. LRs vs State", "case_number": "CRL.A. 286/2016, CRL.A. 326/2016, CRL.A. 691/2016", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Chandrasekharan Sudha" ], "judgment_date": "2026-04-04", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "2000-08-29", "incident_year": 2000, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "false_implication_fabrication", "subcategory": "false_implication_fabrication", "subcategory_display": "false implication fabrication", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 120-B", "IPC 193", "IPC 195", "IPC 218", "IPC 465", "IPC 389" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Police Post Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.07, "jev_p_culpable": 0.95, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Sub-Inspector, Police Post Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Rajouri Garden man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 4, "compensation_inr": 300000, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/10180339/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://lawstreet.co/judiciary/innocent-man-framed-in-false-rape-case-delhi-hc-upholds-conviction-of-lawyer-si-enhances-compensation-to-3-lakh" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeals of lawyer Haji Mohd. Altaf (A1) and SI (A2) and upheld their 2016 conviction for conspiring to frame a Rajouri Garden man in a fabricated gang-rape case on 29 August 2000, to avenge an earlier molestation complaint and extort money. The SI prepared false records, arranged the PCR van and planted hair in the car; a Rajouri Garden man was arrested, beaten in custody and harassed through protracted proceedings until DNA evidence exonerated him and the Crime Branch discharged him in April 2001. The Court held accomplice testimony admissible, observed a more stringent sentence was warranted, and enhanced the compensation to a Rajouri Garden man's legal representatives to the entire fine of Rs 3,00,000. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeals of lawyer Haji Mohd. Altaf (A1) and SI (A2) and upheld their 2016 conviction for conspiring to frame a Rajouri Garden man in a fabricated gang-rape case on 29 August 2000, to avenge an earlier molestation complaint and extort money. The SI prepared false records, arranged the PCR van and planted hair in the car; a Rajouri Garden man was arrested, beaten in custody and harassed through protracted proceedings until DNA evidence exonerated him and the Crime Branch discharged him in April 2001. The Court held accomplice testimony admissible, observed a more stringent sentence was warranted, and enhanced the compensation to a Rajouri Garden man's legal representatives to the entire fine of Rs 3,00,000.", "court_quote": "A2, a police officer, whose duty is to prevent crimes, has in complete disregard to the same, indulged in acts which are in no way justifiable.", "court_quote_para": "39", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; SI's fabrication-conspiracy conviction upheld, victim compensation raised to Rs 3L.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "CRL.A. 286/2016, CRL.A. 326/2016, CRL.A. 691/2016", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-04-04", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "CRL.A. 286/2016, CRL.A. 326/2016, CRL.A. 691/2016", "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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote_para", "officers" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/10180339/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://lawstreet.co/judiciary/innocent-man-framed-in-false-rape-case-delhi-hc-upholds-conviction-of-lawyer-si-enhances-compensation-to-3-lakh", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-28" ], "merged_case_id": "SWFALSEI-004", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0015", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0435", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs State NCT of Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs State NCT of Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": "West Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Patel Nagar", "police_station_or_unit": "Patel Nagar Police Station, Delhi Police", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Head Constable vs State NCT of Delhi", "case_number": "CRL.A. 897/2006", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Chandrasekharan Sudha" ], "judgment_date": "2026-04-15", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "2000-04-03", "incident_year": 2000, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Patel Nagar Police Station, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.95, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Patel Nagar Police Station, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": null, "descriptor": "Patel Nagar resident" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 1, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/48900789/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://tarai24.com/national/from-bike-theft-to-a-cbi-trap-how-a-₹300-bribe-in-1999-led-to-a-delhi-cops-downfall/" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Investigating motorcycle-theft Crime 296/1999, Head Constable of Patel Nagar Police Station withheld the recovered bike's registration certificate and on 3 April 2000 demanded and accepted Rs 300 for returning it; the complainant went to the CBI ACB the same day and a trap caught him red-handed at 4 pm. The Special Judge, Delhi convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the PC Act 1988, sentencing him to six months RI with Rs 1,000 fine and one year RI with Rs 2,000 fine, concurrent. The Delhi High Court held demand inferable from circumstances, with recovery, the phenolphthalein test and presence forming a complete chain. Finding no infirmity in the impugned judgment, the court dismissed the appeal.", "summary_verified": "Investigating motorcycle-theft Crime 296/1999, Head Constable of Patel Nagar Police Station withheld the recovered bike's registration certificate and on 3 April 2000 demanded and accepted Rs 300 for returning it; the complainant went to the CBI ACB the same day and a trap caught him red-handed at 4 pm. The Special Judge, Delhi convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the PC Act 1988, sentencing him to six months RI with Rs 1,000 fine and one year RI with Rs 2,000 fine, concurrent. The Delhi High Court held demand inferable from circumstances, with recovery, the phenolphthalein test and presence forming a complete chain. Finding no infirmity in the impugned judgment, the court dismissed the appeal.", "court_quote": "In the case on hand, the prosecution has clearly established the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification through the consistent testimony of PW8 and the admission of payment by PW2. The recovery of tainted currency notes from the accused, along with the positive phenolphthalein test, further strengthens the prosecution case.", "court_quote_para": "38", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Appeal dismissed; 6-month/1-year RI for Rs 300 bribe upheld.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "CRL.A. 897/2006", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-04-15", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "CRL.A. 897/2006", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/48900789/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://tarai24.com/national/from-bike-theft-to-a-cbi-trap-how-a-₹300-bribe-in-1999-led-to-a-delhi-cops-downfall/", "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-31" ], "merged_case_id": "SWBRIBER-008", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0018", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0100", "alias_merged_ids": [ "CWC-1460" ], "display_title": "Delhi Police Constable v. State of Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Constable v. State of Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": "South Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Mehrauli", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Mehrauli", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Constable v. State of Delhi", "case_number": "CRL.A. 862/2004", "citation": "2026 LiveLaw (Del) 428", "judges": [ "Chandrasekharan Sudha" ], "judgment_date": "2026-04-27", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "1994-07-26", "incident_year": 1994, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "PC Act 1988 s.7", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Station Mehrauli, Delhi Police", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear", "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": null, "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Station Mehrauli, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Mehrauli man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 1, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2026/04/27/76027042026crla8622004151433-670237.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-upholds-police-constables-conviction-for-accepting-1000-bribe-32-years-ago-531963", "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173170880/", "https://courtbook.in/posts/delhi-hc-constable-bribery-conviction-upheld" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed Constable's appeal and upheld his conviction by the Special Judge, Delhi (C.C. No. 56/1998) under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Court found that on 26 July 1994, while posted at Police Station Mehrauli, he demanded and accepted Rs. 1,000 from a Mehrauli man for returning an identity card seized during checking, and was caught in an Anti-Corruption Branch trap. It held the non-examination of the untraceable complainant was not fatal since the panch witness proved demand and acceptance, drawing support from Neeraj Dutta. The Court upheld the sanction granted by the Additional DCP and confirmed one year's rigorous imprisonment on each count with fine, to run concurrently. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed Constable's appeal and upheld his conviction by the Special Judge, Delhi (C.C. No. 56/1998) under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Court found that on 26 July 1994, while posted at Police Station Mehrauli, he demanded and accepted Rs. 1,000 from a Mehrauli man for returning an identity card seized during checking, and was caught in an Anti-Corruption Branch trap. It held the non-examination of the untraceable complainant was not fatal since the panch witness proved demand and acceptance, drawing support from Neeraj Dutta. The Court upheld the sanction granted by the Additional DCP and confirmed one year's rigorous imprisonment on each count with fine, to run concurrently.", "court_quote": "In the present case, once the demand and acceptance stand duly proved from the cogent testimony of PW5 coupled with the recovery of the tainted currency, the statutory presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act stands invoked and shifts the burden upon the accused. However, the accused has failed to discharge the said burden as no plausible or probable explanation has been furnished to rebut the presumption, thereby leaving the prosecution case unrebutted.", "court_quote_para": "24", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment PDF verified; constable's ss.7/13 PC Act conviction and 1-yr sentence upheld.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "2026 LiveLaw (Del) 428", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-04-27", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "2026 LiveLaw (Del) 428", "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.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2026/04/27/76027042026crla8622004151433-670237.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-upholds-police-constables-conviction-for-accepting-1000-bribe-32-years-ago-531963", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173170880/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://courtbook.in/posts/delhi-hc-constable-bribery-conviction-upheld", "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-15", "chunk-31", "chunk-38", "chunk-r09" ], "merged_case_id": "SWBRIBER-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0020", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0114", "alias_merged_ids": [ "CWC-0585" ], "display_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": "Special Branch", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs C.B.I.", "case_number": "CRL.A. 1063/2006", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Chandrasekharan Sudha" ], "judgment_date": "2026-05-05", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "1993-01-01", "incident_year": 1993, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 120-B", "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d)(ii)", "PC Act 1988 s.13(2)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector", "unit": "Special Branch", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_gemapi:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": "yes", "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": "unclear", "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": "yes", "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.08, "jev_p_culpable": 0.95, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Assistant Sub-Inspector, Special Branch" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 0, "sentence_type": "mixed", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/55192143/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-upholds-conviction-of-ex-cop-in-33-year-old-fake-passport-verification-case-533161", "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2026/05/06/76005052026crla10632006123632-672221.pdf" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed ex-ASI [name withheld]'s appeal and upheld his CBI-court conviction for false passport verification reports. Posted in the Special Branch in 1993 and tasked with detailed police verification of two applicants' personal particular forms, he prepared and submitted false reports certifying fictitious addresses as genuine, pursuant to which passports were issued on forged ration cards. Relying on residents and a postman who testified that no such persons lived at the addresses and no verification was conducted there, the Court held a false report had plainly been given and conspiracy inferable. It sustained one year's RI (Section 120-B) and two years' RI (Section 13(1)(d)(ii)/13(2) PC Act) with fines, concurrently. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed ex-ASI [name withheld]'s appeal and upheld his CBI-court conviction for false passport verification reports. Posted in the Special Branch in 1993 and tasked with detailed police verification of two applicants' personal particular forms, he prepared and submitted false reports certifying fictitious addresses as genuine, pursuant to which passports were issued on forged ration cards. Relying on residents and a postman who testified that no such persons lived at the addresses and no verification was conducted there, the Court held a false report had plainly been given and conspiracy inferable. It sustained one year's RI (Section 120-B) and two years' RI (Section 13(1)(d)(ii)/13(2) PC Act) with fines, concurrently.", "court_quote": "Therefore, it is apparent that a false report had been given by A1 on the basis of which the passport was issued. Therefore, the offence under Section 13(1)(d)(ii) of the PC Act is clearly made out.", "court_quote_para": "22", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Delhi HC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; PC Act + 120-B conviction upheld, appeal dismissed.", "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": null, "action_type": "Conviction", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "CRL.A. 1063/2006", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2026-05-05", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "CRL.A. 1063/2006", "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://indiankanoon.org/doc/55192143/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-upholds-conviction-of-ex-cop-in-33-year-old-fake-passport-verification-case-533161", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2026/05/06/76005052026crla10632006123632-672221.pdf", "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-28", "chunk-39" ], "merged_case_id": "DELHI-023", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0040", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0678", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Karawal Nagar Man vs State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Karawal Nagar Man vs State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Karawal Nagar", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Karawal Nagar", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Karawal Nagar Man vs State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.", "case_number": "W.P.(C) 9558/2020", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Sachin Datta" ], "judgment_date": "2026-07-01", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "2018-01-16", "incident_year": 2018, "category": "Custodial death", "admin_category": "brutality", "admin_subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory": "custodial_death", "subcategory_display": "custodial death", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation", "sections": [], "officers": [], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "age": null, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Karawal Nagar man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "compensation_only", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": 1844400, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/28331275/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "A Karawal Nagar man was arrested on 15 January 2018 by SI and lodged at PS Karawal Nagar, where he was found dead the next morning, reported as suicide by hanging; the father alleged assault, a Rs.20,000-30,000 demand, and a staged suicide pointing to unexplained blades and ligature material in the lock-up. The Court held an unnatural death in custody, whatever its mode, attracts the State's duty to compensate, without adjudicating criminal culpability, noting the departmental enquiry's negligence finding against the station staff. It awarded Rs.18,44,400 (dependency, estate and funeral components) payable within eight weeks. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "A Karawal Nagar man was arrested on 15 January 2018 by SI and lodged at PS Karawal Nagar, where he was found dead the next morning, reported as suicide by hanging; the father alleged assault, a Rs.20,000-30,000 demand, and a staged suicide pointing to unexplained blades and ligature material in the lock-up. The Court held an unnatural death in custody, whatever its mode, attracts the State's duty to compensate, without adjudicating criminal culpability, noting the departmental enquiry's negligence finding against the station staff. It awarded Rs.18,44,400 (dependency, estate and funeral components) payable within eight weeks.", "court_quote": "undisputed that the deceased suffered an unnatural death in custody at Police Station Karawal Nagar.", "court_quote_para": "20", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Unnatural lock-up death undisputed; State duty to compensate; Rs.18,44,400 awarded within 8 weeks.", "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": "Custodial death", "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": "2026-07-01", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 1,844,400.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "W.P.(C) 9558/2020", "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": [ "court_quote_para", "officers" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/28331275/", "link_checked": null } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": false, "verified_by": [ "chunk-50" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP7-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0103", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1393", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "CISF Assistant Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) vs CBI", "display_title_redacted": "CISF Assistant Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) vs CBI", "state": "Delhi", "district": "New Delhi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "New Delhi", "police_station_or_unit": "Sports Cell, CISF Headquarters, New Delhi", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "High Court of Delhi", "bench": null, "case_title": "CISF Assistant Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) vs CBI", "case_number": "CRL.A. 578/2010", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Vimal Kumar Yadav" ], "judgment_date": "2026-09-22", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "2004-10-28", "incident_year": 2004, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "corruption", "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act", "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988", "Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Assistant Sub-Inspector (Ministerial)", "unit": "Sports Cell, CISF Headquarters, New Delhi", "role": "convicted", "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": "Assistant Sub-Inspector (Ministerial), Sports Cell, CISF Headquarters, New Delhi" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "New Delhi man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": true, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": "imprisonment", "sentence_max_years": 2, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "central_armed", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/55967950/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Delhi High Court recorded that an Assistant Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) in the Sports Cell of CISF Headquarters, New Delhi, handling the kit allowance of a CISF Inspector who had coached the Indian junior judo team at an Asian championship in Doha, demanded Rs. 5,000 to release the Rs. 10,000 cheque and was caught by the CBI on 28.10.2004 accepting Rs. 3,000. The Special Judge, CBI, Patiala House Courts convicted him on 20.04.2010 under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced him to two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000 on each count, concurrently. On 22.09.2026, sixteen years after the appeal was filed, the High Court rejected his defence that the money was repayment of a loan, upheld the conviction and directed him to surrender to serve the sentence.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court recorded that an Assistant Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) in the Sports Cell of CISF Headquarters, New Delhi, handling the kit allowance of a CISF Inspector who had coached the Indian junior judo team at an Asian championship in Doha, demanded Rs. 5,000 to release the Rs. 10,000 cheque and was caught by the CBI on 28.10.2004 accepting Rs. 3,000. The Special Judge, CBI, Patiala House Courts convicted him on 20.04.2010 under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced him to two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000 on each count, concurrently. On 22.09.2026, sixteen years after the appeal was filed, the High Court rejected his defence that the money was repayment of a loan, upheld the conviction and directed him to surrender to serve the sentence.", "court_quote": "The conviction of the Appellant under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, is accordingly upheld.", "court_quote_para": "53", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Checked against the Delhi High Court judgment dated 22.09.2026 in CRL.A. 578/2010 (Indian Kanoon). Trial-court conviction and sentence at para 1, the trap at para 2, findings at paras 50-52, and the order upholding the conviction and directing surrender at paras 53-54. The complainant, a CISF Inspector, is not named here.", "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": "Court finding", "position_explainer": "A court has made a finding on this allegation.", "official_finding_relation": "supports allegation" } ], "institutional_response": [ { "date": "2026-09-22", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "High Court of Delhi", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The High Court dismissed the appeal, upheld the 2010 conviction under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, and directed the appellant to surrender to serve two years' rigorous imprisonment.", "disposition": "conviction upheld · surrender directed", "source": "CRL.A. 578/2010", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." } ], "later_proceedings": [], "final_outcome_url": null, "followup_history": [ { "date": "2026-10-05", "scope": "Copwatch convictions sweep (5 Oct): record written from the judgment text on Indian Kanoon; quote checked verbatim; the officer and the complainant are not named." } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-10-05", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/55967950/", "link_checked": "2026-10-05" } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": true, "verified_by": [ "claude-opus-5.5-week-1005" ], "merged_case_id": null, "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2026-0099", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1389", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "North East Man vs The State NCT of Delhi", "display_title_redacted": "North East Man vs The State NCT of Delhi", "state": "Delhi", "district": "North East", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": "PS New Usmanpur", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "North East Man vs The State NCT of Delhi", "case_number": "W.P.(CRL.) 3031/2026", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Navin Chawla", "Arun Bhardwaj" ], "judgment_date": "2026-09-25", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2026, "incident_date": "2026-08-21", "incident_year": 2026, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory": "illegal_detention_false_imprisonment", "subcategory_display": "illegal detention false imprisonment", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "adverse_finding", "sections": [ "Article 22 of the Constitution of India", "Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Investigating Officer", "unit": "PS New Usmanpur, Delhi Police", "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": "Investigating Officer, PS New Usmanpur, Delhi Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "North East man" } ], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": true, "victim_count": 1, "sentence_type": null, "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/64980943/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://advocategandhi.com/delhi-high-court-holds-re-arrest-illegal-where-accused-released-for-violation-of-article-22-safeguards-was-taken-back-into-custody-without-judicial-permission/" ], "summary": "The High Court recorded that a man arrested in an FIR at New Usmanpur police station was released by a Karkardooma magistrate on 23.07.2026 because the grounds of arrest supplied to him bore no date or time and gave no details of the incident, as the Supreme Court requires in Mihir Rajesh Shah. Police re-arrested him on 21.08.2026 after POCSO Act offences were added to the FIR, without first seeking the superior officer's endorsement and the court's permission that the Supreme Court prescribes for a re-arrest. The State's counsel, on instructions, accepted that this procedure was not followed. On 25.09.2026 a Division Bench held the re-arrest illegal and in violation of his fundamental rights, and ordered his immediate release on the original magistrate's terms, without expressing any view on the merits of the accusation.", "summary_verified": "The High Court recorded that a man arrested in an FIR at New Usmanpur police station was released by a Karkardooma magistrate on 23.07.2026 because the grounds of arrest supplied to him bore no date or time and gave no details of the incident, as the Supreme Court requires in Mihir Rajesh Shah. Police re-arrested him on 21.08.2026 after POCSO Act offences were added to the FIR, without first seeking the superior officer's endorsement and the court's permission that the Supreme Court prescribes for a re-arrest. The State's counsel, on instructions, accepted that this procedure was not followed. On 25.09.2026 a Division Bench held the re-arrest illegal and in violation of his fundamental rights, and ordered his immediate release on the original magistrate's terms, without expressing any view on the merits of the accusation.", "court_quote": "the re-arrest of the petitioner cannot be justified and is found to be illegal and in violation of his fundamental rights.", "court_quote_para": "15", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Checked against the Delhi High Court order dated 25.09.2026 in W.P.(CRL.) 3031/2026 (Indian Kanoon). The State's concession is at para 13; the finding and release direction at paras 15-16. The underlying accusation is not assessed by the court and is not described here beyond the offences added.", "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": "Court finding", "position_explainer": "A court has made a finding on this allegation.", "official_finding_relation": "supports allegation" } ], "institutional_response": [ { "date": "2026-09-25", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Delhi High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Delhi High Court held the re-arrest illegal and in violation of Article 22 and directed the petitioner's immediate release on the terms set by the magistrate on 23.07.2026.", "disposition": "Adverse finding (illegal re-arrest) · release ordered · no compensation", "source": "W.P.(CRL.) 3031/2026", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." } ], "later_proceedings": [], "final_outcome_url": null, "followup_history": [ { "date": "2026-09-27", "scope": "Past-days sweep (25-27 Sep): record written from the order text on Indian Kanoon; quote checked verbatim; the petitioner, an accused in a POCSO case, is not named." } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-27", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/64980943/", "link_checked": "2026-09-27" }, { "url": "https://advocategandhi.com/delhi-high-court-holds-re-arrest-illegal-where-accused-released-for-violation-of-article-22-safeguards-was-taken-back-into-custody-without-judicial-permission/", "link_checked": "2026-09-27" } ], "source_assessment": { "established": null, "basis": null }, "v3_basis": null, "publication_basis": null, "reviews": [], "retracted": { "is_retracted": false }, "fidelity_checked": true, "verified_by": [ "claude-opus-5.5-week-0927" ], "merged_case_id": null, "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" } ] }