1 Aug 1967
Order issued
ConcludedThe Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: AIR 1970 P&H 81; (1968) 1 ILR (P&H) 368
Not yet re-checked.
CW-1967-0001Ambala, HaryanaJudgment 1 August 1967
Ambala Police Constable (No. 1751) vs Inspector General of Police, Punjab and Others
The judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court records the following account. Constable (No. 1751), posted at the Police Lines, Ambala, allegedly consumed liquor off duty on 3 January 1965 and created a noisy, rowdy scene in Barrack No. 1, and the police doctor opined he had taken liquor. An enquiry by Sub-Inspector held him guilty, and the SP dismissed him on 4 March 1965 for grave misconduct, affirmed on departmental appeal and revision. The High Court held that no prejudice was caused by non-supply of the Reserve Inspector's report, that the medical and other evidence sustained the finding, and that the gravest-misconduct standard for dismissal under Rule 16.2(1) was met on these facts. It dismissed the writ petition, leaving the dismissal intact. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 1 August 1967 in Civil Writ No. 756 of 1966, the Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Tek Chand, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable (No. 1751), Police Lines, Ambala.
- Register number
- HR 01 CW 0001
- Case reference
- Civil Writ No. 756 of 1966 / AIR 1970 P&H 81; (1968) 1 ILR (P&H) 368
- Court and date
- Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Tek Chand, J.), 1 August 1967
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable (No. 1751), Police Lines, Ambala
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Rule 16.2(1) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Having carefully gone through the impugned orders, I cannot find any error or lacunao which may be deemed to be apparent on the face of the record. After giving due weight to the issues raised, I find the petition devoid …” (at para 19)
- 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.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment dated 1 August 1967 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“Having carefully gone through the impugned orders, I cannot find any error or lacunao which may be deemed to be apparent on the face of the record. After giving due weight to the issues raised, I find the petition devoid …” (para 19)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.