4 Aug 2017
Order issued
ConcludedThe Jharkhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: 2018 (1) AJR 63; (2018) 1 JCR 668
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2017-0028Dhanbad, JharkhandJudgment 4 August 2017
CISF Constable vs The Union of India and Others
The Jharkhand High Court Division Bench dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal of CISF constable of the BCCL Dhanbad unit against his removal dated 19 February 2008. The court found three charges proved through a multi-witness enquiry: intoxication on duty, outraging the modesty of a woman during duty hours on 13 June 2007, and incorrigibility from two prior intoxication and one absenteeism punishment. The court held there was no procedural lacuna, with charge sheet, enquiry, pre-penalty hearing and a heard departmental appeal dismissed 30 April 2008, and the Single Judge order of 16 March 2016 committed no error. The removal 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 4 August 2017 in L.P.A. No. 204 of 2016, the Jharkhand High Court (Coram: D. N. Patel, Ratnaker Bhengra, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, CISF Unit, BCCL, Dhanbad.
- Register number
- JH 10 CW 0012
- Case reference
- L.P.A. No. 204 of 2016 / 2018 (1) AJR 63; (2018) 1 JCR 668
- Court and date
- Jharkhand High Court (Coram: D. N. Patel, Ratnaker Bhengra, JJ.), 4 August 2017
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, CISF Unit, BCCL, Dhanbad
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Therefore, there is no substance in this Letters Patent Appeal and the same is, hereby, dismissed.” (at para 14)
- 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 4 August 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.
“Therefore, there is no substance in this Letters Patent Appeal and the same is, hereby, dismissed.” (para 14)
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.