{ "state": "Uttarakhand", "slug": "uttarakhand", "count": 20, "url": "https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/state/uttarakhand", "cases": [ { "record_id": "CW-2005-0005", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0417", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Mahavir Prasad v. U.P. State Public Services Tribunal and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Mahavir Prasad v. U.P. State Public Services Tribunal and Others", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Nainital", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Nainital", "police_station_or_unit": "U.P. Armed Police (directed to join duties at Nainital)", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Mahavir Prasad v. U.P. State Public Services Tribunal and Others", "case_number": "Writ Petition against Tribunal judgment and order dated 06.07.2000", "citation": "2005(2) AWC 1520 (UHC)", "judges": [ "V. S. Sirpurkar", "Prafulla C. Pant" ], "judgment_date": "2005-02-15", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2005, "incident_date": "1991-06-17", "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": [ "Police Act s.7" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Mahavir Prasad", "rank": "Constable", "unit": "U.P. Armed Police (directed to join duties at Nainital)", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.1, "jev_p_culpable": 0.9, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Mahavir Prasad", "display": "Mahavir Prasad (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/1442185/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "Replace closing boilerplate to note the State case as recorded in the dismissal order and Tribunal findings (para 8). Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Replace closing boilerplate to note the State case as recorded in the dismissal order and Tribunal findings (para 8).", "court_quote": "Therefore, we are of the view that the writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "9", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "UHC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; dismissal for unauthorised absence upheld, Arts.14/21/311(2) plea rejected.", "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": "2005-02-15", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "2005(2) AWC 1520 (UHC)", "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", "summary" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1442185/", "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-38" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-014", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2007-0015", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0408", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Constable 40695 Baram Dutt vs State of Uttarakhand and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Constable 40695 Baram Dutt vs State of Uttarakhand and Others", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Udham Singh Nagar", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Rudrapur", "police_station_or_unit": "31st Battalion PAC, Rudrapur", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Constable 40695 Baram Dutt vs State of Uttarakhand and Others", "case_number": "Special Appeal No. 147 of 2007", "citation": "(2007) 12 UK CK 0006; (2008) 8 UC 914", "judges": [ "Rajeev Gupta", "J. C. S. Rawat" ], "judgment_date": "2007-12-12", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2007, "incident_date": "2005-03-22", "incident_year": 2005, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "UP Police Officers of Subordinate Rank (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1991 r.8(2)(b)" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Baram Dutt", "rank": "Constable", "unit": "31st Battalion PAC, Rudrapur", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.95, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Baram Dutt", "display": "Baram Dutt (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/942398/cons-40695-baram-dutt-appellant-hash-state-of-uttarakhand-and-others-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.the-laws.com/encyclopedia/browse/case?caseId=307002394200&title=cons-40695-baram-dutt-vs-state-of-uttarakhand" ], "summary": "Replace closing boilerplate with the recorded State version: counter affidavit pleaded red-handed drunken catch, medical proof of consumption, appellant's guilty plea before the Assistant Commandant, and prior censure entries (para 4). Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Replace closing boilerplate with the recorded State version: counter affidavit pleaded red-handed drunken catch, medical proof of consumption, appellant's guilty plea before the Assistant Commandant, and prior censure entries (para 4).", "court_quote": "It is amply established that the Appellant had consumed the liquor on the relevant time and he was indulged in unbecoming behaviour. Thus, the learned Single Judge was justified in holding that the misconduct of Constable [name withheld] who was on reserve duty cannot be said to be that serious as of the Appellant. The Appellant was found in the state of intoxication while he was performing the Santri duty of the armoury.", "court_quote_para": "12", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Internal discipline: drunk on sentry duty; Rule 8(2)(b) dismissal upheld. No citizen 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": "2007-12-12", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2007) 12 UK CK 0006; (2008) 8 UC 914", "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/942398/cons-40695-baram-dutt-appellant-hash-state-of-uttarakhand-and-others-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.the-laws.com/encyclopedia/browse/case?caseId=307002394200&title=cons-40695-baram-dutt-vs-state-of-uttarakhand", "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": "UTTARA-005", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2008-0009", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0411", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Ishwari Ram vs State of U.P.", "display_title_redacted": "Ishwari Ram vs State of U.P.", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Nainital", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Kaladhungi", "police_station_or_unit": "Sub-treasury guard, Kaladhungi (Armed Police)", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Ishwari Ram vs State of U.P.", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 265 of 2001", "citation": "(2008) CriLJ 4163", "judges": [ "Prafulla C. Pant", "Dharam Veer" ], "judgment_date": "2008-06-02", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2008, "incident_date": "1991-02-28", "incident_year": 1991, "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": "Ishwari Ram", "rank": "Constable (No. 438, Armed Police)", "unit": "Sub-treasury guard, Kaladhungi, Nainital", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Ishwari Ram", "display": "Ishwari Ram (Constable (No. 438, Armed Police))" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Kaladhungi man" }, { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Kaladhungi man" } ], "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/943742/ishwari-ram-appellant-hash-state-of-up-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/514326/ishwari-ram-vs-state-u-p" ], "summary": "Replace closing boilerplate to note the appellant's recorded defence (denial; motive/contradiction pleas at paras 10-13, rejected). Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Replace closing boilerplate to note the appellant's recorded defence (denial; motive/contradiction pleas at paras 10-13, rejected).", "court_quote": "For the reasons, as discussed above, we do not find any error of law or that of the fact committed by the trial Court in convicting the accused under Sections 302 and 307, I.P.C. We concur with the conviction recorded by the trial Court and sentences awarded by said Court to the accused/appellant-Ishwari Ram. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "14-15", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "HC dismissed appeal; life plus 5 years RI confirmed, bail cancelled, 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 Uttarakhand High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Uttarakhand High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2008) CriLJ 4163", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2008-06-02", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2008) CriLJ 4163", "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/943742/ishwari-ram-appellant-hash-state-of-up-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://sooperkanoon.com/case/514326/ishwari-ram-vs-state-u-p", "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": "UTTARA-008", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2009-0007", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0407", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Constable Harish Chand Pandey vs The State", "display_title_redacted": "Constable Harish Chand Pandey vs The State", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Udham Singh Nagar", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Khatima", "police_station_or_unit": "Security guard detail, Rastogi (Prabhat) Farm, Khatima", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Constable Harish Chand Pandey vs The State", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 481 of 2001", "citation": "(2009) NCC 808; (2009) 07 UK CK 0062", "judges": [ "Prafulla C. Pant", "Brahma Singh Verma" ], "judgment_date": "2009-07-28", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2009, "incident_date": "1992-08-22", "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" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Harish Chand Pandey", "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Armed Police, Khatima", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Harish Chand Pandey", "display": "Harish Chand Pandey (Constable)" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Khatima 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/947779/constable-harish-chand-pandey-appellant-hash-the-state-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/browse/Case?CaseId=129002322000&Title=CONSTABLE-HARISH-CHAND-PANDEY-Vs.-STATE" ], "summary": "Replace closing boilerplate to note the appellant's recorded defence (s.313 admissions/denials; pleas of poor light, no motive and drunkenness for s.304 Part I, all rejected at paras 11-13). Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Replace closing boilerplate to note the appellant's recorded defence (s.313 admissions/denials; pleas of poor light, no motive and drunkenness for s.304 Part I, all rejected at paras 11-13).", "court_quote": "From the above oral evidence on record, as discussed above, read with the autopsy report (Ext. A -5) and the report of the Forensic Expert (Ext. A -16) in which it is mentioned that after examination it was found that the empty cartridges sent to the laboratory were found to have been fired from the Rifle No. 84C/5209 (recovered from accused Harish Chand Pandey), establishes on the record that Harish Chand Pandey has committed murder of his colleague a Khatima man", "court_quote_para": "10", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "On-duty murder of fellow officer with service rifle; life + fine confirmed. Borderline scope (police 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 Uttarakhand High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Uttarakhand High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2009) NCC 808; (2009) 07 UK CK 0062", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2009-07-28", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2009) NCC 808; (2009) 07 UK CK 0062", "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/947779/constable-harish-chand-pandey-appellant-hash-the-state-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/browse/Case?CaseId=129002322000&Title=CONSTABLE-HARISH-CHAND-PANDEY-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-30" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-004", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2010-0004", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0409", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "State of Uttaranchal and Others vs Pauri Police Constable and Another", "display_title_redacted": "State of Uttaranchal and Others vs Pauri Police Constable and Another", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Pauri Garhwal", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Pauri", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Lines, Pauri", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "State of Uttaranchal and Others vs Pauri Police Constable and Another", "case_number": null, "citation": "(2010) 05 UK CK 0018", "judges": [ "J. S. Khehar", "Sudhanshu Dhulia" ], "judgment_date": "2010-05-18", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2010, "incident_date": "1997-05-08", "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", "unit": "Police Lines, Pauri", "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, Police Lines, Pauri" } ], "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/943219/state-of-uttaranchal-and-others-appellant-hash-the-public-services-tribunal-and-another-responde/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "Replace closing boilerplate to note respondent No.2's recorded case (heel pain, no medical evidence; condonation plea, rejected at paras 5-6). Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "Replace closing boilerplate to note respondent No.2's recorded case (heel pain, no medical evidence; condonation plea, rejected at paras 5-6).", "court_quote": "Ample opportunity was given to respondent No. 2 in the disciplinary proceedings where he failed to establish his case or to justify his continued unauthorised absence for a period of 205 days. The police is a disciplined force and in case the charge of unauthorized absence is proved, it may invite the maximum punishment.", "court_quote_para": "5", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "State writ allowed; Tribunal order set aside; dismissal for 205-day absence restored. No citizen 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": "2010-05-18", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2010) 05 UK CK 0018", "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/943219/state-of-uttaranchal-and-others-appellant-hash-the-public-services-tribunal-and-another-responde/", "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": "UTTARA-006", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2010-0007", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0419", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Het Ram Puri v. State of Uttaranchal", "display_title_redacted": "Het Ram Puri v. State of Uttaranchal", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Champawat", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Champawat", "police_station_or_unit": "Champawat (transferred from Moradabad)", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Het Ram Puri v. State of Uttaranchal", "case_number": "Writ Petition against SP Champawat order dated 07.12.2000 and DIG Kumaon order dated 27.06.2002", "citation": "(2010) 08 UK CK 0096", "judges": [ "Sudhanshu Dhulia" ], "judgment_date": "2010-08-06", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2010, "incident_date": "1999-07-15", "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": [], "officers": [ { "name": "Het Ram Puri", "rank": "Constable", "unit": "U.P./Uttarakhand Police (transferred Moradabad to Champawat)", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_union:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.1, "jev_p_culpable": 0.84, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Het Ram Puri", "display": "Het Ram Puri (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/945209/het-ram-puri-appellant-hash-state-of-uttaranchal-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed Constable Het Ram Puri's writ petition, upholding his dismissal on 7 December 2000 and the appellate order of June 2002. The Court recorded that after transfer from Moradabad to Champawat in June 1999 with directions to join by 15 July 1999, he never joined and did not participate in the disciplinary proceedings despite notices affixed at his Bareilly home. It rejected his tuberculosis plea for want of a medical certificate or hospital admission, and his argument that leave-without-pay condoned the absence. The Court held the police is a disciplined force and the absence could not be condoned. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed Constable Het Ram Puri's writ petition, upholding his dismissal on 7 December 2000 and the appellate order of June 2002. The Court recorded that after transfer from Moradabad to Champawat in June 1999 with directions to join by 15 July 1999, he never joined and did not participate in the disciplinary proceedings despite notices affixed at his Bareilly home. It rejected his tuberculosis plea for want of a medical certificate or hospital admission, and his argument that leave-without-pay condoned the absence. The Court held the police is a disciplined force and the absence could not be condoned.", "court_quote": "This Court, therefore, finds no merit in the present Writ Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "5", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "UHC judgment verified on CourtKutchehry; dismissal for failure to join transferred posting 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": "2010-08-06", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2010) 08 UK CK 0096", "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/945209/het-ram-puri-appellant-hash-state-of-uttaranchal-respondent/", "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-38" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-016", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2013-0009", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0413", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Devendra Kumar vs State of Uttaranchal and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Devendra Kumar vs State of Uttaranchal and Others", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": "Uttarakhand Police (2001 constable recruitment; training from 18.10.2001)", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Devendra Kumar vs State of Uttaranchal and Others", "case_number": "Civil Appeal (against Special Appeal No. 16 of 2003, Uttarakhand High Court)", "citation": "(2013) 9 SCC 363", "judges": [ "B.S. Chauhan", "S.A. Bobde" ], "judgment_date": "2013-07-29", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2013, "incident_date": "2001-10-18", "incident_year": 2001, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": "Devendra Kumar", "rank": "Constable (recruit, 2001 batch)", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police (training from 18.10.2001)", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_union:no(overruled by grok)" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "yes", "jev_risk": 0.07, "jev_p_culpable": 0.93, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Devendra Kumar", "display": "Devendra Kumar (Constable (recruit, 2001 batch))" } ], "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.lawweb.in/2014/01/suppression-of-material-information.html?m=1", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609af35e4b0149711415d2d" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. Devendra Kumar was selected as a constable in Uttarakhand's September 2001 recruitment and sent for training on 18 October 2001, submitting an affidavit that he had never been involved in any criminal case. Character verification in January 2002 revealed he had in fact been involved in a criminal case in which a final report was later accepted, and he was discharged in April 2002 as a temporary servant. A Single Judge and then a Division Bench of the Uttarakhand High Court upheld the discharge. The Supreme Court dismissed his appeal, holding that suppression of material information sought by the employer itself amounts to moral turpitude and fraud, so the termination was proper and called for no interference.", "summary_verified": "Devendra Kumar was selected as a constable in Uttarakhand's September 2001 recruitment and sent for training on 18 October 2001, submitting an affidavit that he had never been involved in any criminal case. Character verification in January 2002 revealed he had in fact been involved in a criminal case in which a final report was later accepted, and he was discharged in April 2002 as a temporary servant. A Single Judge and then a Division Bench of the Uttarakhand High Court upheld the discharge. The Supreme Court dismissed his appeal, holding that suppression of material information sought by the employer itself amounts to moral turpitude and fraud, so the termination was proper and called for no interference.", "court_quote": "The case pending against a person might not involve moral turpitude but suppressing of this information itself amounts to moral turpitude.", "court_quote_para": "10", "confidence": "medium", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC upheld discharge of constable-recruit for suppressing criminal antecedents in affidavit.", "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": "2013-07-29", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Supreme Court of India", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Supreme Court of India upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2013) 9 SCC 363", "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.lawweb.in/2014/01/suppression-of-material-information.html?m=1", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609af35e4b0149711415d2d", "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": "UTTARA-010", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2013-0016", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0418", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Deepak Singh Bhandari v. State of Uttarakhand and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Deepak Singh Bhandari v. State of Uttarakhand and Others", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Tehri Garhwal", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": "Uttarakhand Police (dismissed by Superintendent of Police, Tehri Garhwal)", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Deepak Singh Bhandari v. State of Uttarakhand and Others", "case_number": "Writ Petition No. 1574 of 2012", "citation": "(2014) LabIC 355", "judges": [ "Alok Singh" ], "judgment_date": "2013-10-29", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2013, "incident_date": "2007-01-01", "incident_year": 2007, "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": "Deepak Singh Bhandari", "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Deepak Singh Bhandari", "display": "Deepak Singh Bhandari (Constable)" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "male", "descriptor": "Tehri Garhwal 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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/944870/deepak-singh-bhandari-appellant-hash-state-of-uttarakhand-and-others-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/browse/Case?CaseId=123102152000&Title=DEEPAK-SINGH-BHANDARI-Vs.-STATE-OF-UTTARAKHAND" ], "summary": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed Constable Deepak Singh Bhandari's writ petition, upholding his dismissal from service on 13 May 2010. The Court recorded that in 2007 he took Rs. 1 lakh from villager a Tehri Garhwal man, claiming influence with superior officers and promising to get a Tehri Garhwal man's son recruited into the Uttarakhand Police, and never refunded the money after the son failed selection. It held the inquiry finding that he had demanded and accepted the money was justified and that such conduct was serious misconduct. The Court found the punishment totally justified; no Prevention of Corruption Act prosecution is recorded in the judgment. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed Constable Deepak Singh Bhandari's writ petition, upholding his dismissal from service on 13 May 2010. The Court recorded that in 2007 he took Rs. 1 lakh from villager a Tehri Garhwal man, claiming influence with superior officers and promising to get a Tehri Garhwal man's son recruited into the Uttarakhand Police, and never refunded the money after the son failed selection. It held the inquiry finding that he had demanded and accepted the money was justified and that such conduct was serious misconduct. The Court found the punishment totally justified; no Prevention of Corruption Act prosecution is recorded in the judgment.", "court_quote": "Therefore, punishment awarded by the Disciplinary Authority in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, seems to be totally justified. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "11", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "UHC judgment verified on CourtKutchehry; dismissal for taking Rs.1 lakh for recruitment upheld (departmental finding only).", "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": "2013-10-29", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2014) LabIC 355", "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/944870/deepak-singh-bhandari-appellant-hash-state-of-uttarakhand-and-others-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/browse/Case?CaseId=123102152000&Title=DEEPAK-SINGH-BHANDARI-Vs.-STATE-OF-UTTARAKHAND", "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-38" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-015", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2015-0001", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0406", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Uttarakhand Police Head Constable and others vs State of Uttarakhand", "display_title_redacted": "Uttarakhand Police Head Constable and others vs State of Uttarakhand", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Haridwar", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Haridwar", "police_station_or_unit": "Uttarakhand Police Escort Party", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Uttarakhand Police Head Constable and others vs State of Uttarakhand", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 2015", "citation": "(2015) 01 UK CK 0003", "judges": [ "Umesh Chandra Dhyani" ], "judgment_date": "2015-01-07", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2015, "incident_date": "2005-08-12", "incident_year": 2005, "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": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 223", "Probation of Offenders Act 1958 s.4" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police Escort Party", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:no_row" ], "ledger_role": null, "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": null, "jev_p_culpable": null, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Uttarakhand Police Escort Party" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police Escort Party", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "ledger:no_row" ], "ledger_role": null, "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": null, "jev_p_culpable": null, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": null, "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Uttarakhand Police Escort Party" } ], "officer_count": 2, "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/254454/head-constable-41-ap-puran-singh-appellant-hash-state-of-uttarakhand-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5ac5e3c44a93261a672b80cb" ], "summary": "The Uttarakhand High Court affirmed the conviction of Head Constable and other escort personnel under Section 223 of the Indian Penal Code for negligently suffering the escape of an undertrial prisoner from custody. The police party was escorting prisoner Gulzar Khan by train from Haldwani to Dehradun on 12 August 2005 when the personnel fell asleep and the handcuffed prisoner escaped. The trial court had sentenced each appellant to three months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs 500. While upholding the conviction, the High Court released the appellants on probation of good conduct for one year under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, and directed refund of the fine. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Uttarakhand High Court affirmed the conviction of Head Constable and other escort personnel under Section 223 of the Indian Penal Code for negligently suffering the escape of an undertrial prisoner from custody. The police party was escorting prisoner Gulzar Khan by train from Haldwani to Dehradun on 12 August 2005 when the personnel fell asleep and the handcuffed prisoner escaped. The trial court had sentenced each appellant to three months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs 500. While upholding the conviction, the High Court released the appellants on probation of good conduct for one year under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, and directed refund of the fine.", "court_quote": "There is no infirmity in the impugned judgment so far as the conviction of the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 223 IPC is concerned. The conviction of the appellants under Section 223 IPC is, therefore, affirmed.", "court_quote_para": "2", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Uttarakhand HC affirmed conviction of Head Constable and escort constables under IPC 223 for negligent escape of prisoner, releasing them on probation.", "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 Uttarakhand High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Uttarakhand High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2015) 01 UK CK 0003", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2015-01-07", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2015) 01 UK CK 0003", "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/254454/head-constable-41-ap-puran-singh-appellant-hash-state-of-uttarakhand-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5ac5e3c44a93261a672b80cb", "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" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2018-0003", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0521", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Uttarakhand Police Sub-Inspector (SHO, PS Dalanwala) v. CBI (Dehradun Man fake encounter case)", "display_title_redacted": "Uttarakhand Police Sub-Inspector (SHO, PS Dalanwala) v. CBI (Dehradun Man fake encounter case)", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Dehradun", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Dehradun", "police_station_or_unit": "PS Dalanwala, Dehradun", "court": "Delhi High Court", "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Uttarakhand Police Sub-Inspector (SHO, PS Dalanwala) v. CBI (Dehradun Man fake encounter case)", "case_number": "CRL.A. Nos. 1003/2014 and connected appeals (against Special CBI Court, Delhi; trial transferred from Dehradun)", "citation": "AIRONLINE 2018 DEL 2424", "judges": [ "S. Muralidhar", "I. S. Mehta" ], "judgment_date": "2018-02-06", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2018, "incident_date": "2009-07-03", "incident_year": 2009, "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 120-B", "IPC 302", "IPC 364" ], "officers": [ { "name": "Santosh Kumar Jaiswal (A1)", "rank": "Sub-Inspector (SHO, PS Dalanwala)", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.11, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Santosh Kumar Jaiswal (A1)", "display": "Santosh Kumar Jaiswal (A1) (Sub-Inspector (SHO, PS Dalanwala))" }, { "name": "Gopal Dutt Bhatt (A2)", "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "PS Dalanwala, Dehradun (attached to Araghar Outpost)", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.1, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Gopal Dutt Bhatt (A2)", "display": "Gopal Dutt Bhatt (A2) (Sub-Inspector)" }, { "name": "Rajesh Bisht (A3)", "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.1, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Rajesh Bisht (A3)", "display": "Rajesh Bisht (A3) (Sub-Inspector)" }, { "name": "Neeraj Kumar (A4)", "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.08, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Neeraj Kumar (A4)", "display": "Neeraj Kumar (A4) (Sub-Inspector)" }, { "name": "Nitin Chauhan (A5)", "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Nitin Chauhan (A5)", "display": "Nitin Chauhan (A5) (Sub-Inspector)" }, { "name": "Chander Mohan Singh Rawat (A6)", "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.09, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Chander Mohan Singh Rawat (A6)", "display": "Chander Mohan Singh Rawat (A6) (Sub-Inspector)" }, { "name": "Ajeet Singh (A7)", "rank": "Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.08, "jev_p_culpable": 0.96, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Ajeet Singh (A7)", "display": "Ajeet Singh (A7) (Constable)" } ], "officer_count": 7, "victims": [ { "age": 20, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Dehradun man, age 20" } ], "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/29093853/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/amp/delhi-hc-upholds-conviction-seven-policemen-encounter-killing-youth-uttarakhand-read-judgment/", "https://www.livelaw.in/amp/dehradun-fake-encounter-case-17-policemen-awarded-life-imprisonment" ], "summary": "The Delhi High Court confirmed the life sentences (plus Rs 50,000 fine each) of seven Uttarakhand policemen for abducting 20-year-old a Dehradun man after a noon scuffle on 3 July 2009 and shooting him dead in a staged encounter near Raipur, Dehradun. Holding the police self-defence version disproved, the Court confirmed the convictions under Sections 120-B, 302 and 364 read with 120-B IPC, while acquitting A-8 to [name withheld] for want of evidence of the larger plan. The Court cancelled the bail of A-1 to A-7, directing surrender forthwith. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court confirmed the life sentences (plus Rs 50,000 fine each) of seven Uttarakhand policemen for abducting 20-year-old a Dehradun man after a noon scuffle on 3 July 2009 and shooting him dead in a staged encounter near Raipur, Dehradun. Holding the police self-defence version disproved, the Court confirmed the convictions under Sections 120-B, 302 and 364 read with 120-B IPC, while acquitting A-8 to [name withheld] for want of evidence of the larger plan. The Court cancelled the bail of A-1 to A-7, directing surrender forthwith.", "court_quote": "This Court confirms the conviction of A-1 to A-7 for the offences under Section 120-B IPC and Sections 302 and 364 read with Section 120-B IPC.", "court_quote_para": "174", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "7 life terms for fake encounter confirmed; A-8 to [name withheld] acquitted. Subcategory, victim age corrected.", "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 2018 DEL 2424", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2018-02-06", "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": "AIRONLINE 2018 DEL 2424", "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/29093853/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/amp/delhi-hc-upholds-conviction-seven-policemen-encounter-killing-youth-uttarakhand-read-judgment/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/amp/dehradun-fake-encounter-case-17-policemen-awarded-life-imprisonment", "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-018", "officers_named_public": 7, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2018-0025", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1312", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Haldwani Woman vs State of Uttarakhand and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Haldwani Woman vs State of Uttarakhand and Others", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Nainital", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Haldwani", "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Haldwani Woman vs State of Uttarakhand and Others", "case_number": "Criminal Writ Petition No. 1050 of 2018", "citation": "(2018) 07 UK CK 0124", "judges": [ "Lok Pal Singh" ], "judgment_date": "2018-07-24", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2018, "incident_date": "2014-08-22", "incident_year": 2014, "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 302", "IPC 324", "CrPC 173", "CrPC 55A", "Constitution Art. 21" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Sub-Inspector", "unit": null, "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" }, { "name": null, "rank": "Investigating Officer", "unit": null, "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" } ], "officer_count": 2, "victims": [ { "age": 36, "gender": "male", "name": null, "descriptor": "Haldwani man, age 36" } ], "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/965314/smt-kalawati-rawat-appellant-hash-state-of-uttarakhand-and-others-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3bc7f621451b4f5df308a8e098112185d/uploads/2024/11/20241130609778589.pdf" ], "summary": "A Haldwani man, aged 36, was lodged in Sub-jail Haldwani on 21 August 2014 and found dead the next day with several injuries on his body; the murder case (Case Crime No. 460 of 2014) twice ended in closure reports calling the death natural. The court found the post-mortem injuries unexplained, held the Investigating Officer had made a false statement before the court and filed final reports without fair investigation, and found the ADM's shielding report false. Holding that fair investigation is part of fair trial under Article 21, it directed the SSP CBI Dehradun to register and investigate the case, the DGP to start a departmental inquiry against SI, and the State to pay Rs 5 lakh compensation to the widow within three months. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "A Haldwani man, aged 36, was lodged in Sub-jail Haldwani on 21 August 2014 and found dead the next day with several injuries on his body; the murder case (Case Crime No. 460 of 2014) twice ended in closure reports calling the death natural. The court found the post-mortem injuries unexplained, held the Investigating Officer had made a false statement before the court and filed final reports without fair investigation, and found the ADM's shielding report false. Holding that fair investigation is part of fair trial under Article 21, it directed the SSP CBI Dehradun to register and investigate the case, the DGP to start a departmental inquiry against SI, and the State to pay Rs 5 lakh compensation to the widow within three months.", "court_quote": "The State Government shall pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to the petitioner on account of custodial death of her husband namely, a Haldwani man within three months from today.", "court_quote_para": "16", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Custodial death with post-mortem injuries; Rs 5 lakh compensation plus CBI probe and dept inquiry against SI.", "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": "2018-07-24", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 500,000.", "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)", "source": "(2018) 07 UK CK 0124", "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/965314/smt-kalawati-rawat-appellant-hash-state-of-uttarakhand-and-others-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3bc7f621451b4f5df308a8e098112185d/uploads/2024/11/20241130609778589.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-126" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-97-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2018-0014", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0410", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Bhagat Ram vs U.P. Public Services Tribunal and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Bhagat Ram vs U.P. Public Services Tribunal and Others", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Dehradun", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Dehradun", "police_station_or_unit": "Civil Police, PS Kotwali, Dehradun", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Bhagat Ram vs U.P. Public Services Tribunal and Others", "case_number": "Writ Petition (S/B) No. 24 of 2001 (Old No. 38017 of 2000)", "citation": "(2018) 09 UK CK 0099", "judges": [ "Rajiv Sharma", "Manoj Kumar Tiwari" ], "judgment_date": "2018-09-26", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2018, "incident_date": "1989-05-12", "incident_year": 1989, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": "Bhagat Ram", "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Civil Police, Dehradun", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.06, "jev_p_culpable": 0.94, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Bhagat Ram", "display": "Bhagat Ram (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/972552/bhagat-ram-appellant-hash-up-public-services-tribunal-others-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the writ petition of Constable Bhagat Ram of the Dehradun Civil Police, affirming the Tribunal and upholding his dismissal for unauthorised absence beginning 12 May 1989. The Court noted he ignored suspension and a charge-sheet served at his home, never participated in the inquiry, and stood dismissed by the SP Dehradun in December 1990 with the DIG appeal failing in 1992 and the Tribunal claim in 1995. It held the inquiry finding was evidence-based, the absence till dismissal stood proved, and no interference was warranted with a disciplined force decision. Scope note: a purely internal disciplinary matter with no citizen victim. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the writ petition of Constable Bhagat Ram of the Dehradun Civil Police, affirming the Tribunal and upholding his dismissal for unauthorised absence beginning 12 May 1989. The Court noted he ignored suspension and a charge-sheet served at his home, never participated in the inquiry, and stood dismissed by the SP Dehradun in December 1990 with the DIG appeal failing in 1992 and the Tribunal claim in 1995. It held the inquiry finding was evidence-based, the absence till dismissal stood proved, and no interference was warranted with a disciplined force decision. Scope note: a purely internal disciplinary matter with no citizen victim.", "court_quote": "Petitioner is a member of disciplined force. As member of disciplined force, petitioner was expected to follow the rules and orders of his superior officers. Petitioner was required to report back for duties on 12.05.1989, but he did not resume duties till his dismissal i.e. 31.12.1990.", "court_quote_para": "11", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Decades-long absence litigation ends; dismissal upheld, Tribunal affirmed. No citizen 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": "2018-09-26", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "(2018) 09 UK 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/972552/bhagat-ram-appellant-hash-up-public-services-tribunal-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-30" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-007", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2019-0004", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0404", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "State of Uttarakhand & Ors. vs Prem Ram", "display_title_redacted": "State of Uttarakhand & Ors. vs Prem Ram", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Pithoragarh", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Berinag", "police_station_or_unit": "Berinag, Pithoragarh", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "State of Uttarakhand & Ors. vs Prem Ram", "case_number": "Civil Appeal No. 3152 of 2019", "citation": "AIRONLINE 2019 SC 914", "judges": [ "D.Y. Chandrachud", "Hemant Gupta" ], "judgment_date": "2019-03-15", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2019, "incident_date": "2006-11-01", "incident_year": 2006, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "other", "subcategory": "other", "subcategory_display": "other", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [], "officers": [ { "name": "Prem Ram", "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Berinag, District Pithoragarh", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "named_safe", "gate_reasons": [], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.07, "jev_p_culpable": 0.93, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": "Prem Ram", "display": "Prem Ram (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/61219925/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/pdf_upload-359469.pdf", "https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-weekly-round-up-143983" ], "summary": "Constable Prem Ram, posted at Berinag in Pithoragarh district, was found in an inebriated state on 1 November 2006 misbehaving with members of the public, with a medical examination confirming he was under the influence of alcohol. After a disciplinary enquiry proved the charge, the Superintendent of Police, Pithoragarh dismissed him on 16 May 2007, and his departmental appeal, revision and writ petition before a Single Judge all failed. A Division Bench of the Uttarakhand High Court, however, converted the dismissal into compulsory retirement citing 25 years of service. The Supreme Court allowed the State's appeal, holding that having regard to the seriousness of the misconduct and the fact that he was a member of the police service, there was no justification to interfere with the dismissal.", "summary_verified": "Constable Prem Ram, posted at Berinag in Pithoragarh district, was found in an inebriated state on 1 November 2006 misbehaving with members of the public, with a medical examination confirming he was under the influence of alcohol. After a disciplinary enquiry proved the charge, the Superintendent of Police, Pithoragarh dismissed him on 16 May 2007, and his departmental appeal, revision and writ petition before a Single Judge all failed. A Division Bench of the Uttarakhand High Court, however, converted the dismissal into compulsory retirement citing 25 years of service. The Supreme Court allowed the State's appeal, holding that having regard to the seriousness of the misconduct and the fact that he was a member of the police service, there was no justification to interfere with the dismissal.", "court_quote": "Having regard to the seriousness of the charge of misconduct and the fact that the respondent was a member of the police service, we find no justification for the High Court to interfere with the order of dismissal.", "court_quote_para": "n/a", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Supreme Court restored dismissal of Constable Prem Ram for drunkenness and misbehaviour with public, setting aside lenient HC order.", "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": "2019-03-15", "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": "AIRONLINE 2019 SC 914", "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/61219925/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/pdf_upload-359469.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-weekly-round-up-143983", "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-13", "chunk-r08" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-001", "officers_named_public": 1, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2020-0005", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0414", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Pithoragarh Police Constable v. State of Uttarakhand", "display_title_redacted": "Pithoragarh Police Constable v. State of Uttarakhand", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Pithoragarh", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Pithoragarh", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Line, Pithoragarh", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Pithoragarh Police Constable v. State of Uttarakhand", "case_number": "Writ Petition (S/B) No. 457 of 2016", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Ramesh Ranganathan", "Ramesh Chandra Khulbe" ], "judgment_date": "2020-02-14", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2020, "incident_date": "2011-10-26", "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": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Police Line, Pithoragarh", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_union:no" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "yes", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": "no", "jev_risk": 0.14, "jev_p_culpable": 0.79, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Police Line, Pithoragarh" } ], "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/60405814/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the writ petition of Constable, affirming the Public Services Tribunal's order upholding his dismissal from service on 4 January 2013. The Court recorded that he absented himself in three spells from 26 October 2011 totalling over a year (99, 247 and 86 days), ignoring joining notices, the preliminary-enquiry notice, the charge-sheet, inquiry notices and the show-cause notice. It held the absence was wilful and prolonged rather than of short duration, disbelieving his medical certificates. The Court found no ground for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the writ petition of Constable, affirming the Public Services Tribunal's order upholding his dismissal from service on 4 January 2013. The Court recorded that he absented himself in three spells from 26 October 2011 totalling over a year (99, 247 and 86 days), ignoring joining notices, the preliminary-enquiry notice, the charge-sheet, inquiry notices and the show-cause notice. It held the absence was wilful and prolonged rather than of short duration, disbelieving his medical certificates. The Court found no ground for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution.", "court_quote": "We are satisfied, in such circumstances, that the order of the Tribunal does not necessitate interference in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "22", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "UHC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; constable's dismissal for prolonged wilful absence 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": "2020-02-14", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "Writ Petition (S/B) No. 457 of 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": "holds", "corrections_applied": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/60405814/", "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-38" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-011", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2021-0005", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0416", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Purnagiri Police Constable v. State of Uttarakhand and Others", "display_title_redacted": "Purnagiri Police Constable v. State of Uttarakhand and Others", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Champawat", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Purnagiri", "police_station_or_unit": "Purnagiri Mela duty / Police Line Almora", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Purnagiri Police Constable v. State of Uttarakhand and Others", "case_number": "Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1289 of 2015", "citation": null, "judges": [ "Ravindra Maithani" ], "judgment_date": "2021-05-04", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2021, "incident_date": "2013-04-17", "incident_year": 2013, "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", "unit": "Purnagiri Mela duty / Police Line Almora", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.92, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Purnagiri Mela duty / Police Line Almora" } ], "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/124467876/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed Constable's writ petition, upholding his termination from service on 18 November 2013. The Court recorded that while on Purnagiri Mela duty on 17 April 2013 he was found intoxicated and misbehaving with tourists, and thereafter remained absent without leave from 18 April to 1 May 2013. It noted a departmental inquiry had proved both charges and his departmental appeal had been dismissed in March 2014. The Court held the acts constituted gross misconduct for a police constable, noted his past warnings and punishments, and found the punishment not disproportionate. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed Constable's writ petition, upholding his termination from service on 18 November 2013. The Court recorded that while on Purnagiri Mela duty on 17 April 2013 he was found intoxicated and misbehaving with tourists, and thereafter remained absent without leave from 18 April to 1 May 2013. It noted a departmental inquiry had proved both charges and his departmental appeal had been dismissed in March 2014. The Court held the acts constituted gross misconduct for a police constable, noted his past warnings and punishments, and found the punishment not disproportionate.", "court_quote": "Having considered all these facts, this Court is of the view that the punishment as imposed upon the petitioner is not disproportionate. There is no merit in this writ petition and it deserves to be dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "30", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "UHC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; termination for intoxication on duty plus absence 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": "2021-05-04", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1289 of 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": [ "court_quote_para" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/124467876/", "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-38" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-013", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2023-0024", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0412", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Uttarakhand Police Constable vs State of Uttarakhand", "display_title_redacted": "Uttarakhand Police Constable vs State of Uttarakhand", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Haridwar", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Haridwar", "police_station_or_unit": "Uttarakhand Police escort party (Haridwar courts)", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "Uttarakhand Police Constable vs State of Uttarakhand", "case_number": "Criminal Revision No. 793 of 2022", "citation": "(2023) 08 UK CK 0135", "judges": [ "Alok Kumar Verma" ], "judgment_date": "2023-08-23", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2023, "incident_date": "2003-07-25", "incident_year": 2003, "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": "conviction_upheld", "sections": [ "IPC 223" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "unit": "Uttarakhand Police escort party (Haridwar courts)", "role": "convicted", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.18, "jev_p_culpable": 0.93, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable, Uttarakhand Police escort party (Haridwar courts)" } ], "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/1174742/constable-rakshpal-singh-appellant-hash-state-of-uttarakhand-respondent/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/64f0cf4db5a7ac7336374918" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Uttarakhand High Court records the following account. On 25 July 2003 Constable and fellow constables were escorting accused [name withheld] back after production before the Special Judge (Gangster Act) when he escaped from their custody at the railway station. The trial court convicted [name withheld] under Section 223 IPC in August 2018 with a Rs 2,000 fine, acquitting him under Section 224, and the I Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar dismissed his appeal in December 2022. In criminal revision the Uttarakhand High Court left the findings of the courts below untouched but, noting 20-year pendency, a clean record and probation granted to two co-accused, altered the sentence to release on probation of good conduct for six months on a Rs 30,000 bond. The court directed that Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 shall apply. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "On 25 July 2003 Constable and fellow constables were escorting accused [name withheld] back after production before the Special Judge (Gangster Act) when he escaped from their custody at the railway station. The trial court convicted [name withheld] under Section 223 IPC in August 2018 with a Rs 2,000 fine, acquitting him under Section 224, and the I Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar dismissed his appeal in December 2022. In criminal revision the Uttarakhand High Court left the findings of the courts below untouched but, noting 20-year pendency, a clean record and probation granted to two co-accused, altered the sentence to release on probation of good conduct for six months on a Rs 30,000 bond. The court directed that Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 shall apply.", "court_quote": "Revisionist was acquitted of the charge framed under Section 224 IPC, however, he was convicted under Section 223 IPC.", "court_quote_para": "8", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Conviction under s.223 IPC maintained; sentence altered to six months probation.", "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 Uttarakhand High Court judgment)", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Uttarakhand High Court judgment.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation", "source": "(2023) 08 UK CK 0135", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2023-08-23", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.", "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)", "source": "(2023) 08 UK CK 0135", "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/1174742/constable-rakshpal-singh-appellant-hash-state-of-uttarakhand-respondent/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/64f0cf4db5a7ac7336374918", "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": "UTTARA-009", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2012-0016", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0551", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Uttarakhand Police Head Constable v. State of Uttarakhand", "display_title_redacted": "Uttarakhand Police Head Constable v. State of Uttarakhand", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Dehradun", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Rishikesh", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Rishikesh", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Uttarakhand Police Head Constable v. State of Uttarakhand", "case_number": "Criminal Appeal Nos. 217 and 218 of 2006", "citation": null, "judges": [], "judgment_date": "2025-01-28", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2012, "incident_date": "2004-11-15", "incident_year": 2004, "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", "Arms Act 1959 s.27(1)" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Head Constable", "role": "convicted", "unit": "Police Station Rishikesh, Uttarakhand Police", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2:no", "key2_union:no", "key2_openrouter:no" ], "ledger_role": "convicted", "key2": "no", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "no", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "no", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.05, "jev_p_culpable": 0.97, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Head Constable, Police Station Rishikesh, Uttarakhand Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [ { "name": null, "age": null, "gender": "female", "descriptor": "Rishikesh woman" } ], "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/191647839/", "secondary_sources": [ "https://lawbeat.in/supreme-court-judgments/no-prior-meeting-minds-supreme-court-acquits-three-constables-fake-encounter-case" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. On the night of 15 November 2004, acting on a liquor-smuggling tip, Head Constable with three constables intercepted a Maruti car near IDPL Gate, Rishikesh, and when it failed to stop, [name withheld] fired a single.38-bore shot that struck front-seat passenger a Rishikesh woman in the temple, killing her. The Sessions Judge, Dehradun convicted [name withheld] under s.302/34 IPC and s.27(1) Arms Act with life imprisonment but acquitted the three constables. The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed [name withheld]'s appeals confirming his life sentence, while additionally convicting the three constables in the State's appeal. The Supreme Court (2025 INSC 114) quashed the three constables' conviction for want of common intention but affirmed the trial judgment, leaving [name withheld]'s life conviction intact. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "On the night of 15 November 2004, acting on a liquor-smuggling tip, Head Constable with three constables intercepted a Maruti car near IDPL Gate, Rishikesh, and when it failed to stop, [name withheld] fired a single.38-bore shot that struck front-seat passenger a Rishikesh woman in the temple, killing her. The Sessions Judge, Dehradun convicted [name withheld] under s.302/34 IPC and s.27(1) Arms Act with life imprisonment but acquitted the three constables. The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed [name withheld]'s appeals confirming his life sentence, while additionally convicting the three constables in the State's appeal. The Supreme Court (2025 INSC 114) quashed the three constables' conviction for want of common intention but affirmed the trial judgment, leaving [name withheld]'s life conviction intact.", "court_quote": "The High Court dismissed the first set of criminal appeals preferred by accused No.1-[name withheld] thereby confirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court.", "court_quote_para": "2", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Uttarakhand HC confirmed head constable's life term for fatal unjustified firing; SC 2025 left it intact.", "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 Nos. 217 and 218 of 2006", "recheck": "Not yet re-checked." }, { "date": "2025-01-28", "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. 217 and 218 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": "wrong_facts", "corrections_applied": [ "case_title", "court", "judgment_date" ] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/191647839/", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://lawbeat.in/supreme-court-judgments/no-prior-meeting-minds-supreme-court-acquits-three-constables-fake-encounter-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-41" ], "merged_case_id": "SWFAKEEN-012", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2025-0006", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0896", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Union of India & Anr. vs Indo-Tibetan Border Police Constable (General Duty)", "display_title_redacted": "Union of India & Anr. vs Indo-Tibetan Border Police Constable (General Duty)", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Uttarkashi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": "ITBP battalion Kote, border post near Uttarkashi", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Union of India & Anr. vs Indo-Tibetan Border Police Constable (General Duty)", "case_number": "Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 18628 of 2019", "citation": "2025 LiveLaw (SC) 668", "judges": [ "Surya Kant", "N. Kotiswar Singh" ], "judgment_date": "2025-05-20", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2025, "incident_date": "2005-07-04", "incident_year": 2005, "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 (General Duty)", "unit": "Indo-Tibetan Border 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 (General Duty), Indo-Tibetan Border Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 0, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "central_armed", "primary_source_url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2025-livelaw-sc-668-union-of-india-v-no-900224364-const-gd-jageshwar-singh-20-may-2025-609899.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-upholds-dismissal-of-itbp-sentry-for-gross-misconduct-cash-box-robbed-guardian-became-looter-294424", "https://courtbook.in/posts/supreme-court-upholds-dismissal-of-itbp-constable-for-robbery-the-custodian-became-the-robber" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. Constable of the ITBP, recruited in 1990, was on sentry duty at the Kote on the night of 4/5 July 2005 guarding company cash boxes containing lakhs of rupees meant for disbursement to personnel. He broke open the Kote lock, took the cash, concealed the cash box about 200 yards away and fled the post, later confessing upon arrest. A Court of Inquiry and Summary Force Court found him guilty on all five charges and dismissed him on 14 November 2005, but a Single Judge and then a Division Bench of the Uttarakhand High Court directed reconsideration of the punishment as disproportionate. The Supreme Court allowed the Union's appeal, holding the robbery involved moral turpitude warranting zero tolerance in a paramilitary force, and restored the dismissal.", "summary_verified": "Constable of the ITBP, recruited in 1990, was on sentry duty at the Kote on the night of 4/5 July 2005 guarding company cash boxes containing lakhs of rupees meant for disbursement to personnel. He broke open the Kote lock, took the cash, concealed the cash box about 200 yards away and fled the post, later confessing upon arrest. A Court of Inquiry and Summary Force Court found him guilty on all five charges and dismissed him on 14 November 2005, but a Single Judge and then a Division Bench of the Uttarakhand High Court directed reconsideration of the punishment as disproportionate. The Supreme Court allowed the Union's appeal, holding the robbery involved moral turpitude warranting zero tolerance in a paramilitary force, and restored the dismissal.", "court_quote": "All members of the force must note that there is zero tolerance for such brazen misconduct, where the guardian of the cash box became its looter.", "court_quote_para": "11", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Supreme Court restored dismissal of ITBP sentry [name withheld] for robbing the company cash box he was guarding.", "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": "2025-05-20", "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) 668", "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://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2025-livelaw-sc-668-union-of-india-v-no-900224364-const-gd-jageshwar-singh-20-may-2025-609899.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-upholds-dismissal-of-itbp-sentry-for-gross-misconduct-cash-box-robbed-guardian-became-looter-294424", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://courtbook.in/posts/supreme-court-upholds-dismissal-of-itbp-constable-for-robbery-the-custodian-became-the-robber", "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-13", "chunk-r08" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-002", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2025-0039", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1122", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Union of India & Ors. v. ITBP Constable (General Duty)", "display_title_redacted": "Union of India & Ors. v. ITBP Constable (General Duty)", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Uttarkashi", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": "Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), Kote sentry post", "court": "Supreme Court of India", "court_as_verified": "Supreme Court of India", "bench": null, "case_title": "Union of India & Ors. v. ITBP Constable (General Duty)", "case_number": "Civil Appeal No. 7029 of 2025 (arising out of SLP(C) No. 18628 of 2019)", "citation": "2025 LiveLaw (SC) 668", "judges": [ "Surya Kant", "N. Kotiswar Singh" ], "judgment_date": "2025-05-20", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2025, "incident_date": "2005-07-04", "incident_year": 2005, "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 (General Duty)", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP)", "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 (General Duty), Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP)" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 0, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "central_armed", "primary_source_url": "https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/2399120192025-05-20-603336.pdf", "secondary_sources": [ "https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-upholds-dismissal-of-itbp-sentry-for-gross-misconduct-cash-box-robbed-guardian-became-looter-294424", "https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/law-order/3451017-supreme-court-confirms-dismissal-of-itbp-constable-for-robbery" ], "summary": "The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. ITBP Constable was on sentry duty at the Kote on the night of 4/5 July 2005 when cash boxes meant for disbursement to company personnel were kept there. The Court found he broke open the lock, stole the cash, hid the box about 200 yards away and deserted his post, and was dismissed on 14 November 2005 after a Summary Force Court trial. The Supreme Court held the confession voluntary, the misconduct grave moral turpitude by a sentry in a sensitive border area with eight prior punishments, and dismissal proportionate. It allowed the Union's appeal, set aside the Uttarakhand High Court orders directing reconsideration of punishment, and restored the dismissal.", "summary_verified": "ITBP Constable was on sentry duty at the Kote on the night of 4/5 July 2005 when cash boxes meant for disbursement to company personnel were kept there. The Court found he broke open the lock, stole the cash, hid the box about 200 yards away and deserted his post, and was dismissed on 14 November 2005 after a Summary Force Court trial. The Supreme Court held the confession voluntary, the misconduct grave moral turpitude by a sentry in a sensitive border area with eight prior punishments, and dismissal proportionate. It allowed the Union's appeal, set aside the Uttarakhand High Court orders directing reconsideration of punishment, and restored the dismissal.", "court_quote": "All members of the force must note that there is zero tolerance for such brazen misconduct, where the guardian of the cash box became its looter.", "court_quote_para": "11", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "SC judgment verified; ITBP sentry's dismissal for cash-box robbery restored (disciplinary_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": "2025-05-20", "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) 668", "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/2399120192025-05-20-603336.pdf", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-upholds-dismissal-of-itbp-sentry-for-gross-misconduct-cash-box-robbed-guardian-became-looter-294424", "link_checked": null }, { "url": "https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/law-order/3451017-supreme-court-confirms-dismissal-of-itbp-constable-for-robbery", "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-101" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-135-001", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }, { "record_id": "CW-2025-0011", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-0415", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "[name withheld] (deceased, through LRs) v. Public Services Tribunal and Others", "display_title_redacted": "[name withheld] (deceased, through LRs) v. Public Services Tribunal and Others", "state": "Uttarakhand", "district": "Tehri Garhwal", "district_at_time": null, "city_town": "Narendra Nagar", "police_station_or_unit": "Police Station Narendra Nagar", "court": "Uttarakhand High Court", "court_as_verified": "Uttarakhand High Court", "bench": null, "case_title": "[name withheld] (deceased, through LRs) v. Public Services Tribunal and Others", "case_number": "Writ Petition (S/B) No. 269 of 2011", "citation": "2025:UHC:5603-DB", "judges": [ "Manoj Kumar Tiwari", "Subhash Upadhyay" ], "judgment_date": "2025-07-02", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2025, "incident_date": "1993-01-12", "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": [], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable (Civil Police)", "unit": "Police Station Narendra Nagar, Tehri Garhwal", "role": "held_liable", "publish_grade": "unnamed", "gate_reasons": [ "key2_openrouter:unclear" ], "ledger_role": "held_liable", "key2": "yes", "key2_agy": null, "key2_claude": null, "key2_union": "yes", "key2_gemapi": null, "key2_openrouter": "unclear", "key2_gpt56": null, "grok": null, "jev_risk": 0.12, "jev_p_culpable": 0.8, "key2_gpt": null, "later_outcome": "none_found", "name_public": null, "display": "Constable (Civil Police), Police Station Narendra Nagar, Tehri Garhwal" } ], "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/25728127/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the legal representatives of deceased Constable, concurring with the Tribunal's order upholding his removal from service. The Court recorded that while posted at Police Station Narendra Nagar and deputed to Police Station Tehri for law-and-order duty, he absented himself from 12 January 1993 without leave and reported back after 123 days on 14 May 1993. It noted he ignored the de novo charge-sheet and enquiry notices leading to an ex parte enquiry and removal on 17 July 1997. The Court held such absence by a uniformed-force member amounts to desertion justifying dismissal. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the legal representatives of deceased Constable, concurring with the Tribunal's order upholding his removal from service. The Court recorded that while posted at Police Station Narendra Nagar and deputed to Police Station Tehri for law-and-order duty, he absented himself from 12 January 1993 without leave and reported back after 123 days on 14 May 1993. It noted he ignored the de novo charge-sheet and enquiry notices leading to an ex parte enquiry and removal on 17 July 1997. The Court held such absence by a uniformed-force member amounts to desertion justifying dismissal.", "court_quote": "Learned Tribunal has given valid reasons for dismissing the claim petition. We concur with the reasons given by learned Tribunal. Thus, there is no scope for interference in the matter. The writ petition fails and is dismissed.", "court_quote_para": "16", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "UHC judgment verified on Indian Kanoon; removal for 123-day desertion 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": "2025-07-02", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Uttarakhand High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Uttarakhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "2025:UHC:5603-DB", "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/25728127/", "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-38" ], "merged_case_id": "UTTARA-012", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" } ] }