1 Feb 2012
Order issued
ConcludedThe Jharkhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2012) 02 JH CK 0108
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2012-0024Bokaro, JharkhandJudgment 1 February 2012
Jharkhand Armed Police Constable vs The State of Jharkhand and Others
The judgment of the Jharkhand High Court records the following account. Constable of Jharkhand Armed Police-4, Bokaro, was charged after being caught by a night patrol on 23 July 2000 leaving the quarters of a fellow constable in the same campus, with grave allegations of misconduct concerning the household. An enquiry with multiple witnesses found him guilty, and he was dismissed in February 2002, a penalty re-affirmed on reconsideration after an earlier writ remanded only the quantum question. The Jharkhand High Court found the enquiry procedurally sound with adequate hearing and held dismissal was not shockingly disproportionate for a member of a disciplined force. The Court dismissed the writ petition. (The private woman's name, stated in the judgment, is withheld here for privacy.). 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 1 February 2012 in W.P.(S) No. 5628 of 2009, the Jharkhand High Court (Coram: Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Jharkhand Armed Police-4, Bokaro.
- Register number
- JH 09 CW 0004
- Case reference
- W.P.(S) No. 5628 of 2009 / (2012) 02 JH CK 0108
- Court and date
- Jharkhand High Court (Coram: Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J.), 1 February 2012
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Jharkhand Armed Police-4, Bokaro
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The petitioner was working in a discipline force. He ought not to have behaved in such a manner. Therefore, the quantum of punishment of dismissal from service cannot be said to be shockingly disproportionate or grossly disproportionate to the nature …” (at para 3.1(iv))
- 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 Jharkhand High Court judgment dated 1 February 2012 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.
“The petitioner was working in a discipline force. He ought not to have behaved in such a manner. Therefore, the quantum of punishment of dismissal from service cannot be said to be shockingly disproportionate or grossly disproportionate to the nature …” (para 3.1(iv))
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.