The Gujarat High Court (Anant S. Dave, J.) on 8 February 2008 rejected the Article 226 petition of Armed Police Constable (SRPF Cadre 10, Ukai) and upheld his dismissal dated 8 April 1993. A departmental enquiry with three witnesses had proved that on 14 September 1990, during communally surcharged conditions in Vadodara, he left a sensitive riot-duty point near Ranavav Masjid in the Wadi Police Station area from 20:15 hrs without his superior's permission. The court held the enquiry followed the rules, noted nine prior unauthorised absences between 1984 and 1990, and held dismissal proportionate since even brief dereliction at such a point could trigger an uncontrollable law-and-order situation. No civilian victim is involved; this is a duty-desertion dismissal upheld on judicial review. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
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 →By judgment dated 8 February 2008 in Special Civil Application (challenging dismissal order dated 08.04.1993; appeal 27.07.1993; revision 11.01.1994), the Gujarat High Court (Coram: Anant S. Dave, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Armed Police Constable, State Reserve Police Force, Cadre No. 10, Ukai.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Gujarat High Court judgment dated 8 February 2008 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
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.
Holding not recorded separately.
“On the contrary, the misconduct on the part of the petitioner of remaining absent from duty at a highly sensitive point situated in communally surcharged area of Vadodara City is grave in nature and cannot be pardoned.” (para para 5)
The Gujarat High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
(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.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.
