21 Feb 2011
Order issued
ConcludedThe Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: W.P.(C) No.18511/2004
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2011-0024Central Delhi, DelhiJudgment 21 February 2011
Delhi Police Assistant Commissioner of Police (SHO at the time) vs Union of India & Ors.
In August 1980, a Subzi Mandi man @ a Subzi Mandi man was illegally detained at Andha Mughal police post under PS Subzi Mandi and died in custody on 6 August 1980; other personnel were convicted for the custodial death while the then SHO's role was pursued departmentally. The Court held the petitioner, as SHO, had knowledge of the illegal detention, took no action, and was instrumental in showing the death as suicide to hush up the matter. Finding grave misconduct and a proportionate penalty, it dismissed the writ against the CAT order, leaving intact the 50% permanent pension cut and 50% gratuity forfeiture imposed under the CCS (Pension) Rules after his 1997 superannuation. 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 February 2011 in W.P.(C) No.18511/2004, the Delhi High Court (Coram: Anil Kumar, Veena Birbal, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Assistant Commissioner of Police (SHO at the time), Police Station Subzi Mandi, Delhi Police.
- Register number
- DL 06 CW 0017
- Case reference
- W.P.(C) No.18511/2004
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: Anil Kumar, Veena Birbal, JJ.), 21 February 2011
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Assistant Commissioner of Police (SHO at the time), Police Station Subzi Mandi, Delhi Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “no grounds to interfere with the order of the Tribunal dated 10th February, 2004 in O.A No.1855/2003” (at para 20)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Disciplinary action upheld.
- 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 21 February 2011 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.
“no grounds to interfere with the order of the Tribunal dated 10th February, 2004 in O.A No.1855/2003” (para 20)
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.