6 Mar 1961
Order issued
ConcludedThe Supreme Court of India upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: Civil Appeal No. 490 of 1957
Not yet re-checked.
CW-1961-0001Uttar PradeshJudgment 6 March 1961
U.P. Police Inspector of Police (officiating Deputy Superintendent of Police) vs State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
The Supreme Court on 6 March 1961 dismissed with costs the appeal of [name withheld], a U.P. Police Inspector officiating as Deputy Superintendent in the Anti-Corruption Department, upholding his dismissal from service. The Court recorded that complaints of immorality, corruption and gross dereliction of duty led to an Administrative Tribunal enquiry, which recommended dismissal in February 1950, and the Governor dismissed him with effect from December 1950. The majority held the Governor's dismissal power was not ousted by the Police Act and the Tribunal procedure caused no prejudice or substantial Article 14 discrimination. The dismissal therefore stood; no criminal conviction arose on this record. 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 6 March 1961 in Civil Appeal No. 490 of 1957, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: S. K. Das, N. Rajagopala Ayyangar, M. Hidayatullah, K. C. Das Gupta, J. C. Shah, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Inspector of Police (officiating Deputy Superintendent of Police), U.P. Police, Anti-Corruption Department.
- Register number
- UP 00 CW 0001
- Case reference
- Civil Appeal No. 490 of 1957
- Court and date
- Supreme Court of India (Coram: S. K. Das, N. Rajagopala Ayyangar, M. Hidayatullah, K. C. Das Gupta, J. C. Shah, JJ.), 6 March 1961
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Inspector of Police (officiating Deputy Superintendent of Police), U.P. Police, Anti-Corruption Department
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as dismissed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 7 of the Police Act, 1861; the U.P. Disciplinary Proceedings (Administrative Tribunal) Rules, 1947; Article 14 of the Constitution of India; Article 311 of the Constitution of India
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The Tribunal framed three charges against the appellant, and after a detailed survey of the evidence recommended on February 4, 1950, that the appellant be dismissed from service. The Governor then served a notice requiring the appellant to show cause …” (at para 1)
- 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 Supreme Court of India judgment dated 6 March 1961 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 Tribunal framed three charges against the appellant, and after a detailed survey of the evidence recommended on February 4, 1950, that the appellant be dismissed from service. The Governor then served a notice requiring the appellant to show cause …” (para 1)
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.