CW-2021-0011Bidar, KarnatakaJudgment 30 June 2021

Bidar Police Civil Police Constable (CPC 1100) vs The Superintendent of Police, Bidar and Another

The judgment of the Karnataka High Court records the following account. Civil Police Constable, who joined in 1992 and served at Janavada Police Station, Bidar, faced a charge memo dated 7 August 2005 alleging he contracted a second marriage with Farzana Begum while his first wife [name withheld] was living, violating Rule 28 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1966. The disciplinary authority removed him from service in January 2007; the appellate authority modified the penalty to compulsory retirement in April 2007, and the KSAT dismissed his application in 2018. The Division Bench found no infirmity or illegality by the respondents or the KSAT, noting compulsory retirement is the prescribed penalty for second marriage, and dismissed the writ petition as devoid of merits. 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 →

Report card

By judgment dated 30 June 2021 in Writ Petition No. 200927/2021 (S-KAT) (against KSAT Application No. 4115/2008, 24.07.2018), the Karnataka High Court (Coram: S. G. Pandit, M. G. S. Kamal, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Civil Police Constable (CPC 1100), Janavada Police Station, Bidar.

Register number
KA 38 CW 0003
Case reference
Writ Petition No. 200927/2021 (S-KAT) (against KSAT Application No. 4115/2008, 24.07.2018)
Court and date
Karnataka High Court (Coram: S. G. Pandit, M. G. S. Kamal, JJ.), 30 June 2021
Officer(s) at the material time
Civil Police Constable (CPC 1100), Janavada Police Station, Bidar
Present service status
Recorded in the cited sources as compulsorily retired.
Provisions invoked
Rule 28 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1966
Finding of the Court (extract)
“we do not find any infirmity or illegality having been committed either by the respondents or by the KSAT” (at para 12)
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.

The Karnataka High Court judgment dated 30 June 2021 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
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.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“we do not find any infirmity or illegality having been committed either by the respondents or by the KSAT” (para 12)

Institutional response

1
30 Jun 2021

Order issued

Concluded
Karnataka High Court External · Binding

The Karnataka High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.

Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: Writ Petition No. 200927/2021 (S-KAT) (against KSAT Application No. 4115/2008, 24.07.2018)
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
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.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.