19 Aug 2019
Order issued
ConcludedThe Calcutta High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2019) 08 CAL CK 0059
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2019-0008South Andaman, Andaman and Nicobar IslandsJudgment 19 August 2019
Nicobar Police personnel vs Union of India and Others
The Calcutta High Court Division Bench dismissed the writ petition of [name withheld] of the Andaman and Nicobar Police, whose termination (order dated 7 July 2009) followed proved disciplinary charges of demanding money for a police job, kidnapping/molestation/robbery, and mobile-phone theft. The Court examined the subsequent criminal-trial acquittals and held none was honourable, being based on hostile witnesses and wanting evidence. It found no infirmity in the DGP's refusal to review the penalty under the A&N Police Manual or in the CAT order of 18 December 2018. The termination from the disciplined force therefore stands confirmed. 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 19 August 2019 in WPCT No. 153 of 2019, the Calcutta High Court (Coram: Subrata Talukdar, Arindam Mukherjee, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Police personnel, Andaman and Nicobar Police.
- Register number
- AN 01 CW 0003
- Case reference
- WPCT No. 153 of 2019 / (2019) 08 CAL CK 0059
- Court and date
- Calcutta High Court (Coram: Subrata Talukdar, Arindam Mukherjee, JJ.), 19 August 2019
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police personnel, Andaman and Nicobar Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “the petitioner, being a member of discipline force, must be said to have lost confidence in his employer and therefore, not fit to be retained in service.” (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 Calcutta High Court judgment dated 19 August 2019 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.
“the petitioner, being a member of discipline force, must be said to have lost confidence in his employer and therefore, not fit to be retained in service.” (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.