29 Aug 1986
Order issued
ConcludedThe Rajasthan High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (1986) WLN 550
Not yet re-checked.
CW-1986-0003Churu, RajasthanJudgment 29 August 1986
Churu Police Constable vs State of Rajasthan and Others
The judgment of the Rajasthan High Court records the following account. Constable of the Rajasthan Police challenged his removal from service after remaining absent from the Police Line, Churu from 28 May 1981 to 4 February 1982 and failing to appear before the enquiry officer despite repeated summons. He pleaded that his father had been attacked and hospitalised, that a land dispute had led to his implication in a Section 307 IPC case, and that no enquiry notice was served on him. The court found that he had deliberately avoided service and the enquiry despite knowledge of the charge-sheet, calling such conduct grossly indisciplined and least expected of a member of a disciplined force. It held that reasons for dispensing with a Rule 16 enquiry under Rule 19(2) of the 1958 Rules could be contained in the final order, and dismissed the writ petition, keeping the removal in force. 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 29 August 1986 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1096 of 1985, the Rajasthan High Court (Coram: Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Police Line, Churu.
- Register number
- RJ 10 CW 0002
- Case reference
- S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1096 of 1985 / (1986) WLN 550
- Court and date
- Rajasthan High Court (Coram: Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.), 29 August 1986
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Police Line, Churu
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as removed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Rule 16 of the Rajasthan CCA Rules, 1958; Rule 19(2) of the Rajasthan CCA Rules, 1958
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “It is least expected from a disciplined force official to avoid service of notice and avoid to appear before the Enquiry Officer for one reason or the other and such conduct cannot be lightly condoned.” (at para 5)
- 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 Rajasthan High Court judgment dated 29 August 1986 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.
“It is least expected from a disciplined force official to avoid service of notice and avoid to appear before the Enquiry Officer for one reason or the other and such conduct cannot be lightly condoned.” (para 5)
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.