17 May 2016
Order issued
ConcludedThe Jharkhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2016) 3 AIR Jhar R 861; (2016) 3 JCR 717
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2016-0028Dhanbad, JharkhandJudgment 17 May 2016
Dhanbad Police Constable vs The State of Jharkhand and Others
The Jharkhand High Court Division Bench dismissed the appeal of Constable against his dismissal for snatching Rs. 17,000 from passenger a Dhanbad resident at Dhanbad Railway Station on 28 July 2008 and for unauthorised absence. The court held the ex parte enquiry was fair, with registered notice sent, local police alerted, the written defence considered and two witnesses examined, and that non-examination of the victim did not make it a no-evidence case. It found dismissal was not a disproportionate penalty. The dismissal, already affirmed in appeal, memorial and writ, therefore stands.
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 17 May 2016 in L.P.A. No. 2 of 2016, the Jharkhand High Court (Coram: Virender Singh, Shree Chandrashekhar, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Dhanbad Police.
- Register number
- JH 10 CW 0011
- Case reference
- L.P.A. No. 2 of 2016 / (2016) 3 AIR Jhar R 861; (2016) 3 JCR 717
- Court and date
- Jharkhand High Court (Coram: Virender Singh, Shree Chandrashekhar, JJ.), 17 May 2016
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Dhanbad Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 384 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Having considered all aspects of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the instant Letters Patent Appeal lacks merit and accordingly, it warrants dismissal. Ordered accordingly.” (at para 15)
- 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 17 May 2016 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.
“Having considered all aspects of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the instant Letters Patent Appeal lacks merit and accordingly, it warrants dismissal. Ordered accordingly.” (para 15)
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.