13 Aug 2013
Order issued
ConcludedThe Karnataka High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: Writ Petition No. 78358/2013 (S-KAT)
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2013-0032Belagavi, KarnatakaJudgment 13 August 2013
Belagavi Police Police Constable vs State of Karnataka
The judgment of the Karnataka High Court records the following account. Police Constable of Belgaum Market Police Station and two colleagues were charged with stealing KSRTC bus warrants and misappropriating Rs.25,670 with the connivance of Mysore depot bus conductors, leading to his removal from service on 11 March 1999 after an enquiry with 22 witnesses, affirmed on appeal. His challenge before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, filed 8.5 years late, was rejected on delay and merits. He contended separate enquiries for supervising officers and discriminatory punishment vitiated the order. The High Court held the inspectors faced only supervision charges justifying censure while proved theft, forgery and misappropriation warranted dismissal, dismissing the writ petition. 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 13 August 2013 in Writ Petition No. 78358/2013 (S-KAT), the Karnataka High Court (Coram: N. Kumar, Aravind Kumar, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Police Constable, Belgaum Market Police Station, Belgaum.
- Register number
- KA 22 CW 0003
- Case reference
- Writ Petition No. 78358/2013 (S-KAT)
- Court and date
- Karnataka High Court (Coram: N. Kumar, Aravind Kumar, JJ.), 13 August 2013
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police Constable, Belgaum Market Police Station, Belgaum
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as removed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Therefore, having regard to the nature of mis-conduct proved, the punishment imposed is just and proper.” (at para 11)
- 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 Karnataka High Court judgment dated 13 August 2013 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.
“Therefore, having regard to the nature of mis-conduct proved, the punishment imposed is just and proper.” (para 11)
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.