3 Mar 2023
Order issued
ConcludedThe Telangana High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: Writ Petition No. 24577 of 2022
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2023-0037Medchal-Malkajgiri, TelanganaJudgment 3 March 2023
Rachakonda Police Reserve Sub-Inspector v. The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda & Ors.
The Telangana High Court dismissed the writ petition of Reserve Sub-Inspector challenging the major penalty imposed after a woman complainant alleged he tried to outrage her modesty on the pretext of coaching her for police-constable recruitment (Crime No. 357 of 2019, Malkajgiri). The Court held the departmental charge proved on preponderance of probabilities, that his explanation was not genuine, that the criminal acquittal on hostile witnesses had no bearing on the departmental finding, and that he had violated Rule 3 of the Conduct Rules. It sustained the postponement of increments for three years with effect on future increments and pension, with the suspension period treated as not on duty. 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 3 March 2023 in Writ Petition No. 24577 of 2022, the Telangana High Court (Coram: N.V. Shravan Kumar, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Reserve Sub-Inspector, Rachakonda Police Commissionerate.
- Register number
- TG 08 CW 0001
- Case reference
- Writ Petition No. 24577 of 2022
- Court and date
- Telangana High Court (Coram: N.V. Shravan Kumar, J.), 3 March 2023
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Reserve Sub-Inspector, Rachakonda Police Commissionerate
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Rule 3 of the Telangana Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964; Rule 9(vi)-(x), r.21(5) of the CCA Rules; Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The petitioner did not maintain absolute integrity towards his job and he got involved in a criminal case in Cr.No.357 of 2019 under Section 354-D IPC of Malkajgiri PS., which is derogatory to the image of Police department in the …” (at para para 32)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Disciplinary action upheld.
- 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 Telangana High Court judgment dated 3 March 2023 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 petitioner did not maintain absolute integrity towards his job and he got involved in a criminal case in Cr.No.357 of 2019 under Section 354-D IPC of Malkajgiri PS., which is derogatory to the image of Police department in the …” (para para 32)
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.