25 Jan 2006
Order issued
ConcludedThe Supreme Court of India upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2006) 3 SCC 173
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2006-0017Andhra PradeshJudgment 25 January 2006
The Commissioner of Police and Others vs Andhra Pradesh Police Police Constable
remove/replace final sentence; appellants' (police) case is recorded via counter affidavit before APAT. 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 25 January 2006 in Civil Appeal No. 6319 of 2004, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: S. B. Sinha, P. P. Naolekar, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Police Constable, Andhra Pradesh Police.
- Register number
- AP 39 CW 0021
- Case reference
- Civil Appeal No. 6319 of 2004 / (2006) 3 SCC 173
- Court and date
- Supreme Court of India (Coram: S. B. Sinha, P. P. Naolekar, JJ.), 25 January 2006
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police Constable, Andhra Pradesh Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “In a situation of this nature, keeping in view the nature of duties that a protector of law is required to perform, we are firmly of the opinion that the disciplinary authority cannot be said to have committed an error …” (at para n/a)
- 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 Supreme Court of India judgment dated 25 January 2006 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 a situation of this nature, keeping in view the nature of duties that a protector of law is required to perform, we are firmly of the opinion that the disciplinary authority cannot be said to have committed an error …” (para n/a)
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.