14 Sep 2016
Order issued
ConcludedThe Patna High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 378 of 2011
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2016-0033Ranchi, JharkhandJudgment 14 September 2016
CRPF Constable and others vs The Union of India and Others
The judgment of the Patna High Court records the following account. [name withheld] [name withheld], a CRPF constable of 133 Battalion at Dhurwa, Ranchi, challenged his May 2010 dismissal for overstaying leave sanctioned from January to February 2009. The court found he had remained absent for hundreds of days without justifiable reason, rejecting his medical and bias pleas. The court held that overstay by members of a disciplined force is indiscipline to be dealt with sternly and that the punishment suffered no infirmity on merits or quantum. The writ petition was dismissed, and the dismissal, already affirmed in appeal and revision, 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 14 September 2016 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 378 of 2011, the Patna High Court (Coram: Jyoti Saran, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, 133 Battalion, CRPF.
- Register number
- JH 01 CW 0009
- Case reference
- Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 378 of 2011
- Court and date
- Patna High Court (Coram: Jyoti Saran, J.), 14 September 2016
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, 133 Battalion, CRPF
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “the order of punishment is not capable for being interfered with either on merits or on quantum.” (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 Patna High Court judgment dated 14 September 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.
“the order of punishment is not capable for being interfered with either on merits or on quantum.” (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.