4 Nov 2019
Order issued
ConcludedThe Patna High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: 2020 (1) PLJR 184
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2019-0036Gaya, BiharJudgment 4 November 2019
Gaya Police Constable vs The State of Bihar and Ors.
The Patna High Court dismissed a writ petition by constable seeking reconsideration of his 1999 dismissal in light of his 2019 criminal acquittal. The court noted he had been dismissed after Departmental Proceeding No. 62 of 1998 proved he abandoned his post and arms during the 17-09-1998 Naxalite attack on the Pretshila Parwat picket in Gaya, in which two constables were killed and rifles looted. It held departmental findings rest on evidence different from criminal trials and the dismissal had attained finality with the dismissal of his earlier writ in 2012. The dismissal from service was therefore left undisturbed. 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 November 2019 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 19188 of 2019, the Patna High Court (Coram: Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Pretshila Parwat police picket, Gaya.
- Register number
- BR 02 CW 0007
- Case reference
- Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 19188 of 2019 / 2020 (1) PLJR 184
- Court and date
- Patna High Court (Coram: Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.), 4 November 2019
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Pretshila Parwat police picket, Gaya
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as dismissed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “In the departmental proceeding, the allegation against the petitioner was of having abandoned his Post and his Arms without any due permission from the superior authority.” (at para 6)
- 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 4 November 2019 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.
“In the departmental proceeding, the allegation against the petitioner was of having abandoned his Post and his Arms without any due permission from the superior authority.” (para 6)
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.