31 Aug 1971
Order issued
ConcludedThe Bombay High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (1972) 74 BomLR 304; 1972 LIC 1453
Not yet re-checked.
CW-1971-0001Nandurbar, MaharashtraJudgment 31 August 1971
Nawapur Police Constable v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court sustained the dismissal of constable, caught in an Anti-Corruption trap accepting a Rs. 5 bribe at Nawapur on 14 April 1958, even though he had been acquitted in the criminal trial under s.161 IPC. The court held that a criminal acquittal does not bind the departmental authority where proceedings rest on the same facts, and that the domestic tribunal's finding could not be struck down as based on no evidence. It sustained the lower appellate decree reversing the trial court's decree in the constable's favour. The second appeal failed and the dismissal stood, with the appellant directed to pay court-fees.
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 31 August 1971 in Second Appeal (citation (1972) 74 BomLR 304), the Bombay High Court (Coram: Deshpande, J., J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Nawapur Police Station.
- Register number
- MH 39 CW 0001
- Case reference
- Second Appeal (citation (1972) 74 BomLR 304) / (1972) 74 BomLR 304; 1972 LIC 1453
- Court and date
- Bombay High Court (Coram: Deshpande, J., J.), 31 August 1971
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Nawapur Police Station
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Rule 445 of the Bombay Police Manual; Article 311 of the Constitution of India
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Result is that the appeal fails. As the appeal was allowed to be filed in forma pauperis, the appellant is directed to pay Court-fees. In the circumstances of the case, however, there will be no order as to other costs.” (at para 15)
- 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 Bombay High Court judgment dated 31 August 1971 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.
“Result is that the appeal fails. As the appeal was allowed to be filed in forma pauperis, the appellant is directed to pay Court-fees. In the circumstances of the case, however, there will be no order as to other costs.” (para 15)
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.