29 Apr 2004
Order issued
ConcludedThe Jharkhand High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2004) 3 JCR 130
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2004-0011East Singhbhum, JharkhandJudgment 29 April 2004
Jharkhand Police Constable vs State of Jharkhand and Others
On 18 January 2002 constable, escorting three accused including murder-accused [name withheld] from jail to the Jamshedpur Sadar Court, left Singh untied and unhandcuffed, allowing him to remove his handcuffs and escape; Bistupur P.S. Case No. 19/2002 under Sections 224, 225 and 120B IPC followed. Departmental Proceeding No. 31 of 2002 ended in his discharge/dismissal on 21 June 2002, confirmed on appeal on 5 November 2002. The Jharkhand High Court (Tapen Sen, J.) held the inquiry evidence established gross negligence in escort duty, that a writ court cannot substitute findings of fact, and that dismissal for letting a serious offender escape was not disproportionate. The writ petition was dismissed on 29 April 2004. Later proceedings: on 13 February 2007, the Jharkhand High Court set aside the order recorded in this judgment (concerning [name withheld]); the outcome recorded here therefore does not stand. 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 April 2004 in Writ Petition (S) No. 6666 of 2002, the Jharkhand High Court (Coram: Tapen Sen, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable, Jharkhand Police, Jamshedpur Sadar Court.
- Register number
- JH 05 CW 0001
- Case reference
- Writ Petition (S) No. 6666 of 2002 / (2004) 3 JCR 130
- Court and date
- Jharkhand High Court (Coram: Tapen Sen, J.), 29 April 2004
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Jharkhand Police, Jamshedpur Sadar Court
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 224 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 225 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “In this case it was the duty and responsibility of the Constable to safely bring back a serious offender to the Court Lockup but because of his negligence and carelessness, which amounts to gross dereliction of duty, the said criminal …” (at para 10)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Disciplinary action upheld. Sentence: dismissal.
- Present status of the proceedings
- Jharkhand High Court, 13 February 2007: conviction set aside.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Jharkhand High Court judgment dated 29 April 2004 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.
“In this case it was the duty and responsibility of the Constable to safely bring back a serious offender to the Court Lockup but because of his negligence and carelessness, which amounts to gross dereliction of duty, the said criminal …” (para 10)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
13 Feb 2007
Order set aside
ConcludedLater proceedings: on 13 February 2007, the Jharkhand High Court set aside the order recorded in this judgment (concerning [name withheld]); the outcome recorded here therefore does not stand.
Later proceeding · Conviction not standing.
Source: Indiankanoon Org
Not yet re-checked.
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.