21 Jan 2014
Order issued
ConcludedThe Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: LPA No. 1516 of 2013
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2014-0001Panipat, HaryanaJudgment 21 January 2014
District Police Head Constable vs State of Haryana and others
Head Constable of the Haryana Police Commando Wing, Panipat was convicted on 29 March 2011 under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in an FIR registered by the Anti-Corruption Branch, Delhi. Following his conviction, he was dismissed from service on 7 June 2012 by Haryana Police, which he challenged contending that dismissal must await the outcome of his criminal appeal before the Delhi High Court. The Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed his Letters Patent Appeal, holding that Rule 16.2(2) of the Punjab Police Rules contains no bar against dismissal pending appeal and that it is contrary to the public interest to retain a corruption convict in the police force.
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 21 January 2014 in LPA No. 1516 of 2013, the Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Jasbir Singh, Harinder Singh Sidhu, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Head Constable, Commando Wing, District Police Panipat, Haryana Police.
- Register number
- HR 06 CW 0002
- Case reference
- LPA No. 1516 of 2013
- Court and date
- Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Jasbir Singh, Harinder Singh Sidhu, JJ.), 21 January 2014
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Head Constable, Commando Wing, District Police Panipat, Haryana Police
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as dismissed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; Rule 16.2(2) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Moreover, Hon'ble the Supreme Court has in various cases held that it is not in public interest to retain in service any official who has been convicted of an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Resultantly, the appeal …” (at para n/a)
- 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 Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment dated 21 January 2014 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.
“Moreover, Hon'ble the Supreme Court has in various cases held that it is not in public interest to retain in service any official who has been convicted of an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Resultantly, the appeal …” (para n/a)
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.