# Prayagraj Police Constable v. State of U.P. & Ors.

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2011-0036](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2011-0036)

## Report card

By judgment dated 5 September 2011 in Civil Appeal No. 7643 of 2011, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: Mukundakam Sharma, Anil R. Dave, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, IV Battalion, Provincial Armed Constabulary, Allahabad.

- Register number: UP 70 CW 0001
- Case reference: Civil Appeal No. 7643 of 2011 / \[2011\] 11 SCR 136
- Court and date: Supreme Court of India (Coram: Mukundakam Sharma, Anil R. Dave, JJ.), 5 September 2011
- Officer(s) at the material time: Constable, IV Battalion, Provincial Armed Constabulary, Allahabad
- Present service status: Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked: Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract): “The appellant belongs to a disciplinary force and the members of such a force is required to maintain discipline and to act in a befitting manner in public. Instead of that, he was found under the influence of liquor and …” (at para 12)
- 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.
- Source orders: [Judgment / order (primary source)](https://orderlaw-bphmhzeseagsd2ce.z03.azurefd.net/cms-cnr-data/supreme_court_data/pdf_files/jonew/judis/38454.pdf); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2011-0036)

**Record:** CW-2011-0036 (compiler id CWC-1117); case GAP3-130-002
**Title:** Prayagraj Police Constable v. State of U.P. & Ors.
**Court:** Supreme Court of India; judges: Mukundakam Sharma; Anil R. Dave
**Case number / citation:** Civil Appeal No. 7643 of 2011 / \[2011\] 11 SCR 136
**Judgment:** 2011-09-05 (2011, day precision)
**Incident date:** 1991-10-27 (1991)
**Place:** Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh (district at time: Allahabad); city town: Prayagraj; police station or unit: IV Battalion, PAC, Allahabad; force: state_police
**Category:** Other misconduct
**Sub-category:** other
**Outcome:** Disciplinary action upheld (disciplinary_upheld)
**Sections:** IPC 392
**Officers (gated display forms):** Constable, IV Battalion, Provincial Armed Constabulary, Allahabad (1 in record)
**Victims:** Not stated (0 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** dismissal
**Sentence type:** dismissal (dismissal)

The appellant, a constable in the IV Battalion, Provincial Armed Constabulary, Allahabad, was unauthorisedly absent on 27 October 1991 and that evening forcibly grabbed a liquor bottle from a wine shop and threatened the staff; medical examination found he had consumed alcohol though he was not intoxicated. A departmental inquiry held the charges proved and he was dismissed on 11 February 1993; the departmental appeal, the U.P. Public Services Tribunal and the Allahabad High Court all upheld the dismissal, though he was acquitted in the linked criminal case under Section 392 IPC. The Supreme Court held the criminal acquittal had no bearing on the departmental proceedings given the different standards of proof, and that dismissal of a member of a disciplined force found under the influence of liquor was not shocking to the conscience. The appeal was dismissed with parties bearing their own costs.

> The appellant belongs to a disciplinary force and the members of such a force is required to maintain discipline and to act in a befitting manner in public. Instead of that, he was found under the influence of liquor and then indulged himself in an offence.

**Sources (1):** [orderlaw-bphmhzeseagsd2ce.z03.azurefd.net](https://orderlaw-bphmhzeseagsd2ce.z03.azurefd.net/cms-cnr-data/supreme_court_data/pdf_files/jonew/judis/38454.pdf)
**Verification:** V2 · Externally reported
**Review:** Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded
**admin category:** misconduct
**admin subcategory:** other
**allegations:** {'category': 'Other', 'primary': True, 'position': 'Material fact supported', 'position_explainer': 'Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.', 'official_finding_relation': 'supports allegation'}
**anonymised:** False
**court quote para:** 12
**display title redacted:** Prayagraj Police Constable v. State of U.P. & Ors.
**followup history:** {'date': '2026-09-19', 'scope': 'Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass', 'method': 'skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl)', 'result': 'holds', 'corrections_applied': \[\]}
**followup status:** checked
**institutional response:** {'date': '2011-09-05', 'action_type': 'Order issued', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Supreme Court of India', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The Supreme Court of India upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.', 'disposition': 'Disciplinary action · Procedural only', 'source': '\[2011\] 11 SCR 136', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-19
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://orderlaw-bphmhzeseagsd2ce.z03.azurefd.net/cms-cnr-data/supreme_court_data/pdf_files/jonew/judis/38454.pdf', 'link_checked': None}
**retracted:** {"is_retracted": false}
**service:** police
**source assessment:** {"established": null, "basis": null}
**status:** current
**subcategory display:** other
**tier:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**tier badge:** Externally reported
**tier history:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**verdict:** accept
**verdict note:** SC dismissed appeal; dismissal of PAC constable for absence and liquor-related misconduct upheld.
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Disciplinary action upheld.

[Open CW-2011-0036](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2011-0036)