28 May 2019
Order issued
ConcludedThe Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2019) 05 DEL CK 0188
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2019-0032South Delhi, DelhiJudgment 28 May 2019
Delhi Armed Police Head Constable vs Govt. of NCTD & Ors.; [name withheld] vs Govt. of NCTD & Ors.
The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Head Constable and Constable of the Delhi Armed Police were detailed for the safe custody of undertrial prisoner Vikas Yadav, admitted in the ortho private ward of AIIMS, but colluded with him and took him out on the intervening night of 26/27 October 2011, returning only the next morning. Seven prosecution witnesses including AIIMS doctors and nursing staff supported the charge, and a joint departmental inquiry found both guilty, leading to their removal from the force, affirmed on appeal and by the CAT. The Delhi High Court held the gravity of the proved misconduct justified the punishment and dismissed both writ petitions. 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 28 May 2019 in W.P.(C) Nos. 5926/2019 and 6044/2019, the Delhi High Court (Coram: Vipin Sanghi, Rajnish Bhatnagar, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against 2 police personnel, namely: Head Constable, Delhi Armed Police (DAP), Delhi Police; Constable, Delhi Armed Police (DAP), Delhi Police.
- Register number
- DL 03 CW 0022
- Case reference
- W.P.(C) Nos. 5926/2019 and 6044/2019 / (2019) 05 DEL CK 0188
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: Vipin Sanghi, Rajnish Bhatnagar, JJ.), 28 May 2019
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Head Constable, Delhi Armed Police (DAP), Delhi Police; Constable, Delhi Armed Police (DAP), Delhi Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Rule 8(a) of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980; Section No.125 of 2008 of the Standing Order
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The Disciplinary and the Appellate Authorities have said enough, and the gravity of the misconduct established against the petitioners is enough to justify the punishment imposed upon them.” (at para 13)
- 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 Delhi High Court judgment dated 28 May 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 Disciplinary and the Appellate Authorities have said enough, and the gravity of the misconduct established against the petitioners is enough to justify the punishment imposed upon them.” (para 13)
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.