10 Feb 2009
Order issued
ConcludedThe Rajasthan High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4155/1997
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2009-0019Didwana-Kuchaman, RajasthanJudgment 10 February 2009
Rajasthan Police Constable vs State of Rajasthan & Anr.
The judgment of the Rajasthan High Court records the following account. Rajasthan Police Constable was charge-sheeted under Rule 16 on two counts: assaulting a civilian on 6 July 1994 (FIR No. 53 under Sections 451, 323 and 504 IPC) and disobeying the DSP 's order of 8 July 1994 to report at Police Station Makrana, challenging the superior to take any action. A regular inquiry examining 11 prosecution witnesses found both charges proved, leading to removal from service in December 1996, affirmed in appeal in October 1997. The court found the criminal act and gross misbehaviour toward the superior stood established on adequate evidence, held a member of a disciplined force must act cautiously and adhere to discipline, and held removal was not shockingly disproportionate. It dismissed the writ petition, sustaining the removal. Later proceedings: on 12 September 2018, the Rajasthan High Court set aside the order recorded in this judgment (concerning [name withheld]); the outcome recorded here therefore does not stand. 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 10 February 2009 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4155/1997, the Rajasthan High Court (Coram: Govind Mathur, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Rajasthan Police, Makrana.
- Register number
- RJ 37 CW 0002
- Case reference
- S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4155/1997
- Court and date
- Rajasthan High Court (Coram: Govind Mathur, J.), 10 February 2009
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Rajasthan Police, Makrana
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as removed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 451 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Rule 16 of the Rajasthan CCA Rules, 1958; Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Article 227 of the Constitution of India
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “From perusal of the inquiry report and order passed by the Disciplinary Authority, it is apparent that the petitioner was found guilty for indulging himself in criminal act and also gross misbehaviour and indiscipline with his superior officer.” (at para n/a)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Disciplinary action upheld. Sentence: dismissal.
- Present status of the proceedings
- Rajasthan High Court, 12 September 2018: conviction set aside.
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 10 February 2009 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.
“From perusal of the inquiry report and order passed by the Disciplinary Authority, it is apparent that the petitioner was found guilty for indulging himself in criminal act and also gross misbehaviour and indiscipline with his superior officer.” (para n/a)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
12 Sep 2018
Order set aside
ConcludedLater proceedings: on 12 September 2018, the Rajasthan High Court set aside the order recorded in this judgment (concerning [name withheld]); the outcome recorded here therefore does not stand.
Later proceeding · Conviction not standing.
Source: Indiankanoon Org
Not yet re-checked.
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.