5 Nov 2001
Order issued
ConcludedThe Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: 2001 (6) ALT 229
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2001-0009Chittoor, Andhra PradeshJudgment 5 November 2001
Pakala Police Sub-Inspector of Police vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, Home Department and Anr.
The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Sub-Inspector, upholding his dismissal from service for corrupt misconduct. The officer had illegally detained two traders, a Pakala man and a Pakala man, on false allegations of possessing stolen copper wire, and demanded and received bribes of Rs 1,400 and Rs 3,000 to release them without registering cases. The Court confirmed the findings of the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings and the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, holding that the charges were established on the standard of preponderance of probabilities. 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 5 November 2001, the Andhra Pradesh High Court (Coram: S.R. Nayak, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against 2 police personnel, namely: Sub-Inspector of Police, Pakala Police Station; Head Constable, Pakala Police Station.
- Register number
- AP 39 CW 0017
- Case reference
- 2001 (6) ALT 229
- Court and date
- Andhra Pradesh High Court (Coram: S.R. Nayak, J.), 5 November 2001
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Sub-Inspector of Police, Pakala Police Station; Head Constable, Pakala Police Station
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as dismissed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Rule 2(b) of the A.P. Civil Services (Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal) Rules, 1960
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “It is also very relevant to notice that there is no controversy according to the evidence on record, the charged officer demanded the bribe on 28-8-1981 and even on 29-8-1981 insisted for payment of bribe.” (at para 6)
- 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 Andhra Pradesh High Court judgment dated 5 November 2001 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 also very relevant to notice that there is no controversy according to the evidence on record, the charged officer demanded the bribe on 28-8-1981 and even on 29-8-1981 insisted for payment of bribe.” (para 6)
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.