29 Nov 1954
Order issued
ConcludedThe Punjab High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: I.L.R. Punjab Series, Vol. VIII, p. 934
Not yet re-checked.
CW-1954-0005Shimla, Himachal PradeshJudgment 29 November 1954
Punjab State v. [name withheld]
The Punjab High Court sustained the dismissal of Head Constable (officiating ASI) [name withheld] of Simla, who was dismissed on 25 January 1944 after a departmental enquiry found he had misused his wartime posting in the Censor Department to extract and keep private letters and attempt to blackmail the young woman addressee, for which a trap had caught him. The court held subordinate police were governed by s.243 (not s.240(3)) of the Government of India Act, 1935, that breach of procedural rules gives no right of action, and that both courts below took an erroneous view of law. It allowed the State's second appeal, set aside the decrees declaring the dismissal void, and dismissed the policeman's suit with costs. Simla was then in Punjab and is now Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. 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 29 November 1954 in Regular Second Appeal No. 891 of 1951, the Punjab High Court (Coram: Kapur, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Head Constable (officiating Assistant Sub-Inspector), Punjab Police, Simla (Censor Department posting).
- Register number
- HP 03 CW 0001
- Case reference
- Regular Second Appeal No. 891 of 1951 / I.L.R. Punjab Series, Vol. VIII, p. 934
- Court and date
- Punjab High Court (Coram: Kapur, J.), 29 November 1954
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Head Constable (officiating Assistant Sub-Inspector), Punjab Police, Simla (Censor Department posting)
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 7 of the Police Act, 1861; Section 243 of the GOI Act, 1935
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “I would therefore allow this appeal, set aside the decree of the Courts below and dismiss the plaintiff's suit with costs throughout.” (at para n/a)
- 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 Punjab High Court judgment dated 29 November 1954 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.
“I would therefore allow this appeal, set aside the decree of the Courts below and dismiss the plaintiff's suit with costs throughout.” (para n/a)
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.