30 Aug 2016
Order issued
ConcludedThe Patna High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: Letters Patent Appeal No. 2115 of 2015
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2016-0032Dakshin Dinajpur, West BengalJudgment 30 August 2016
BSF Non-Commissioned Officer vs The Union of India and Others
[name withheld], a BSF non-commissioned officer in charge of the Kote (armoury) of 57 Battalion at Patiram, was dismissed in July 2007 after an enquiry found Rs.53,440 concealed in an old register inside the Kote under his control. The court found he had been given a fair hearing with a defence assistant and that concealment of private money in the armoury was unauthorized. The court held that even on re-appreciation of the evidence no illegality tainted the punishment. The appeal was dismissed and the dismissal stands.
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 30 August 2016 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 2115 of 2015, the Patna High Court (Coram: Hemant Gupta, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Non-Commissioned Officer, 57th Battalion, BSF.
- Register number
- WB 61 CW 0001
- Case reference
- Letters Patent Appeal No. 2115 of 2015
- Court and date
- Patna High Court (Coram: Hemant Gupta, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ.), 30 August 2016
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Non-Commissioned Officer, 57th Battalion, BSF
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “even on re-appreciation of evidence, we find no illegality in the order of punishment against the appellant.” (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 Patna High Court judgment dated 30 August 2016 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.
“even on re-appreciation of evidence, we find no illegality in the order of punishment against the appellant.” (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.