3 Mar 2014
Order issued
ConcludedThe Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: Civil Writ Petition No.12030 of 2010
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2014-0020Rohtak, HaryanaJudgment 3 March 2014
Haryana Police Head Constable vs State of Haryana and Others
The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the writ petition of Head Constable of the Haryana Police, Rohtak, upholding his dismissal from service following a corruption conviction. [name withheld] had been booked in FIR No.182 of 21.5.1988 at Police Station Civil Lines, Rohtak, convicted by the Special Judge, Rohtak in 1989 under ss.420/161 IPC and ss.5(1)(d)/5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment; the High Court sustained the conviction in 2003 while releasing him on probation. The Court held the conviction involved moral turpitude directly relatable to his duties, probation was not exoneration, and dismissal under Article 311(2)(a) and the Punjab Police Rules was fully justified. His departmental appeal and revision had already failed in 2007-2008.
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 3 March 2014 in Civil Writ Petition No.12030 of 2010, the Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Augustine George Masih, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Head Constable, Haryana Police, District Rohtak.
- Register number
- HR 12 CW 0007
- Case reference
- Civil Writ Petition No.12030 of 2010
- Court and date
- Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Augustine George Masih, J.), 3 March 2014
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Head Constable, Haryana Police, District Rohtak
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as dismissed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947; Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The exercise of powers under Article 311(2)(a) of the Constitution of India and Rules 16.2(2) read with Rule 16.2(4)(ix)(b) of Punjab Police Rules, awarding punishment of dismissal from service is fully justified and in accordance with law.” (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 Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment dated 3 March 2014 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 exercise of powers under Article 311(2)(a) of the Constitution of India and Rules 16.2(2) read with Rule 16.2(4)(ix)(b) of Punjab Police Rules, awarding punishment of dismissal from service is fully justified and in accordance with law.” (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.