21 Jul 2000
Order issued
ConcludedThe Gujarat High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: Special Civil Application No. 1912 of 2000
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2000-0005Kheda, GujaratJudgment 21 July 2000
H. N. Rao vs State of Gujarat
The Gujarat High Court dismissed former PSI H. N. Rao challenge to his dismissal from service following his 5 May 1998 conviction by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad, in Special Case 7 of 1994 under Section 161 IPC (1 year RI plus Rs 1,000 fine) and the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 (2 years RI plus Rs 2,000 fine). The petitioner contended dismissal during the pendency of his criminal appeal without hearing or GPSC consultation was illegal. The Court held, following the Full Bench in P. D. Waghela and the Supreme Court in Tulsiram Patel, that a trial-court conviction sustains dismissal under the second proviso to Article 311(2) despite a pending appeal with no hearing or GPSC consultation required. It found the dismissal wholly justified and discharged the notice. 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 21 July 2000 in Special Civil Application No. 1912 of 2000, the Gujarat High Court (Coram: R. M. Doshit, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the H. N. Rao (Police Sub-Inspector).
- Register number
- GJ 07 CW 0003
- Case reference
- Special Civil Application No. 1912 of 2000
- Court and date
- Gujarat High Court (Coram: R. M. Doshit, J.), 21 July 2000
- Officer(s) at the material time
- H. N. Rao (Police Sub-Inspector)
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as dismissed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “In view of the conviction of the petitioner and the sentence imposed upon him, the impugned order dismissing the petitioner from service is wholly justified.” (at para 12)
- 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 Gujarat High Court judgment dated 21 July 2000 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.
“In view of the conviction of the petitioner and the sentence imposed upon him, the impugned order dismissing the petitioner from service is wholly justified.” (para 12)
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.