# Punjab State v. \[name withheld\]

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-1954-0005](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-1954-0005)

## Report card

By judgment dated 29 November 1954 in Regular Second Appeal No. 891 of 1951, the Punjab High Court (Coram: Kapur, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Head Constable (officiating Assistant Sub-Inspector), Punjab Police, Simla (Censor Department posting).

- Register number: HP 03 CW 0001
- Case reference: Regular Second Appeal No. 891 of 1951 / I.L.R. Punjab Series, Vol. VIII, p. 934
- Court and date: Punjab High Court (Coram: Kapur, J.), 29 November 1954
- Officer(s) at the material time: Head Constable (officiating Assistant Sub-Inspector), Punjab Police, Simla (Censor Department posting)
- Present service status: Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked: Section 7 of the Police Act, 1861; Section 243 of the GOI Act, 1935
- Finding of the Court (extract): “I would therefore allow this appeal, set aside the decree of the Courts below and dismiss the plaintiff's suit with costs throughout.” (at para n/a)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum: Disciplinary action upheld. Sentence: dismissal.
- Present status of the proceedings: No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
- Source orders: [Judgment / order (primary source)](https://highcourtchd.gov.in/landmark_judgments/HC/English/Regular%20Second%20Appeal%20No._891_1951.pdf); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-1954-0005)

**Record:** CW-1954-0005 (compiler id CWC-1055); case GAP3-109-002
**Title:** Punjab State v. \[name withheld\]
**Court:** Punjab High Court; judges: Kapur
**Case number / citation:** Regular Second Appeal No. 891 of 1951 / I.L.R. Punjab Series, Vol. VIII, p. 934
**Judgment:** 1954-11-29 (1954, day precision)
**Incident date:** 1944-01-01 (1944)
**Place:** Shimla, Himachal Pradesh (district at time: Simla (Punjab, pre-reorganisation)); city town: Shimla; police station or unit: Punjab Police, Simla (Censor Department posting); force: state_police
**Category:** Bribery & extortion
**Sub-category:** extortion
**Outcome:** Disciplinary action upheld (disciplinary_upheld)
**Sections:** Police Act 1861 s.7; GOI Act 1935 s.243
**Officers (gated display forms):** Head Constable (officiating Assistant Sub-Inspector), Punjab Police, Simla (Censor Department posting) (1 in record)
**Victims:** Shimla woman (1 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** dismissal
**Sentence type:** dismissal (dismissal)

The Punjab High Court sustained the dismissal of Head Constable (officiating ASI) \[name withheld\] of Simla, who was dismissed on 25 January 1944 after a departmental enquiry found he had misused his wartime posting in the Censor Department to extract and keep private letters and attempt to blackmail the young woman addressee, for which a trap had caught him. The court held subordinate police were governed by s.243 (not s.240(3)) of the Government of India Act, 1935, that breach of procedural rules gives no right of action, and that both courts below took an erroneous view of law. It allowed the State's second appeal, set aside the decrees declaring the dismissal void, and dismissed the policeman's suit with costs. Simla was then in Punjab and is now Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

> I would therefore allow this appeal, set aside the decree of the Courts below and dismiss the plaintiff's suit with costs throughout.

**Sources (1):** [highcourtchd.gov.in](https://highcourtchd.gov.in/landmark_judgments/HC/English/Regular%20Second%20Appeal%20No._891_1951.pdf)
**Verification:** V2 · Externally reported
**Review:** Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded
**admin category:** misconduct
**admin subcategory:** extortion
**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'}
**anonymised:** False
**court quote para:** n/a
**display title redacted:** Punjab State v. \[name withheld\]
**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
**institutional response:** {'date': '1954-11-29', 'action_type': 'Order issued', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Punjab High Court', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The Punjab High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.', 'disposition': 'Disciplinary action · Procedural only', 'source': 'I.L.R. Punjab Series, Vol. VIII, p. 934', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-19
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://highcourtchd.gov.in/landmark_judgments/HC/English/Regular%20Second%20Appeal%20No._891_1951.pdf', 'link_checked': None}
**retracted:** {"is_retracted": false}
**service:** police
**source assessment:** {"established": null, "basis": null}
**status:** current
**subcategory display:** extortion
**tier:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**tier badge:** Externally reported
**tier history:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**verdict:** accept
**verdict note:** Judgment verified from official HC ILR scan; dismissal for blackmail-type misconduct sustained. Court name is the 1954 official name (predecessor of Punjab and Haryana HC).
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Disciplinary action upheld.

[Open CW-1954-0005](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-1954-0005)