The Gujarat High Court (J.B. Pardiwala J., 7 June 2016) rejected the Article 226 writ of former Police Constable, confirming his removal from service. The court recorded that on 8 September 1994 he assaulted on-duty unarmed constable at the Vav Treasury, consumed liquor and misbehaved with the Treasury Officer, and escaped from custody. The court held that his acquittals in the related criminal cases, decided on proof beyond reasonable doubt, did not undo the departmental finding of serious misconduct proved on preponderance of probability. It declined to re-appreciate the domestic-inquiry evidence and found no interference warranted with the removal order as affirmed in appeal and revision.
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 →By judgment dated 7 June 2016 in Special Civil Application No. 25765 of 2007 with Civil Application No. 4140 of 2016, the Gujarat High Court (Coram: J. B. Pardiwala, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Police Constable, Banaskantha, Gujarat Police.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Gujarat High Court judgment dated 7 June 2016 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
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.
Holding not recorded separately.
“A Police Constable cannot take law in his own hands and indulge in any act which would tarnish the image of the department.” (para 7)
The Gujarat High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
(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.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.
