11 Apr 2002
Order issued
ConcludedThe Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: 99(2002)DLT715; 2002(64)DRJ260
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2002-0021West Delhi, DelhiJudgment 11 April 2002
Delhi Police Constable (No. 1822/W) vs Union of India and Ors.
Constable of PS Punjabi Bagh was dismissed on 14.11.1998 after a departmental enquiry found he consumed liquor on duty at a picket on Road No. 77 on 1.3.1998 and assaulted fellow Constable, causing simple blunt injuries. His departmental appeal and CAT Original Application were dismissed, and he challenged the dismissal under Article 226. The Court held the liquor-taking and assault proved on preponderance of probability on the victim's categorical evidence, the SI's report and both MLCs, rejecting pleas of non-examination of doctors and Rule 15 violation. Finding no case for interference, the Court dismissed the writ petition, leaving the dismissal from service 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 11 April 2002 in CWP arising from CAT OA No. 1372/1999 (writ number not stated), the Delhi High Court (Coram: S. B. Sinha, A. K. Sikri, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable (No. 1822/W), PS Punjabi Bagh, West District, Delhi Police.
- Register number
- DL 04 CW 0004
- Case reference
- CWP arising from CAT OA No. 1372/1999 (writ number not stated) / 99(2002)DLT715; 2002(64)DRJ260
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: S. B. Sinha, A. K. Sikri, JJ.), 11 April 2002
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable (No. 1822/W), PS Punjabi Bagh, West District, Delhi Police
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as dismissed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Although the doctors had not been examined, the fact that the petitioner had taken liquor and assaulted the said a Delhi man, has been proved.” (at para 13)
- 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 Delhi High Court judgment dated 11 April 2002 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.
“Although the doctors had not been examined, the fact that the petitioner had taken liquor and assaulted the said a Delhi man, has been proved.” (para 13)
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.