14 Jul 2017
Order issued
ConcludedThe Jharkhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: W.P.(S) No. 4430 of 2008
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2017-0027Deoghar, JharkhandJudgment 14 July 2017
Jharkhand Armed Police Constable vs The State of Jharkhand and Others
The Jharkhand High Court Single Judge dismissed the writ petition of JAP-5 constable challenging his dismissal dated 30 May 2008 for overstaying ten days leave from 12 to 22 April 2004 by about two years. The court found the enquiry officer rightly held the absence wilful and deliberate, since the mental-illness certificates were belatedly produced and no tuberculosis certificate or leave intimation ever reached the authorities. The court held Article 226 review permits interference only where punishment is shockingly disproportionate, which was not shown, distinguishing precedents on shorter absences. The dismissal therefore stands. 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 14 July 2017 in W.P.(S) No. 4430 of 2008, the Jharkhand High Court (Coram: S. N. Pathak, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Jharkhand Armed Police-5, Deoghar.
- Register number
- JH 15 CW 0001
- Case reference
- W.P.(S) No. 4430 of 2008
- Court and date
- Jharkhand High Court (Coram: S. N. Pathak, J.), 14 July 2017
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Jharkhand Armed Police-5, Deoghar
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Resultantly, the impugned order warrants no interference and the writ petition fails and stands dismissed.” (at para 13)
- 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 14 July 2017 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.
“Resultantly, the impugned order warrants no interference and the writ petition fails and stands dismissed.” (para 13)
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.