25 Jun 2019
Order issued
ConcludedThe Patna High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: AIRONLINE 2019 PAT 1295
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2019-0033Latehar, JharkhandJudgment 25 June 2019
CRPF Constable (General Duty) v. Union of India and Others
CRPF Constable (GD) [name withheld], 11th Battalion at Latehar, was dismissed on 10.08.2013 for leaving the campus without permission in a Naxal-affected area on 11.07.2012, consuming liquor, and brawling with fellow personnel, misconduct he admitted before the Enquiry Officer. The appellate authority converted dismissal into removal (17.10.2014) and the revision was rejected (17.12.2014). The Patna High Court held the findings rested on admitted facts proved through six witnesses by a confidence-inspiring procedure and required no interference. The writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merit. 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 25 June 2019 in CWJC No. 7092 of 2015, the Patna High Court (Coram: Madhuresh Prasad, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable (General Duty), CRPF, 11th Battalion, Latehar.
- Register number
- JH 19 CW 0001
- Case reference
- CWJC No. 7092 of 2015 / AIRONLINE 2019 PAT 1295
- Court and date
- Patna High Court (Coram: Madhuresh Prasad, J.), 25 June 2019
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable (General Duty), CRPF, 11th Battalion, Latehar
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The findings of the Disciplinary Authority are based on admitted facts and circumstances, for reasons and by a procedure which inspires confidence. The same does not require any interference in the opinion of this Court.” (at para 8)
- 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 25 June 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 findings of the Disciplinary Authority are based on admitted facts and circumstances, for reasons and by a procedure which inspires confidence. The same does not require any interference in the opinion of this Court.” (para 8)
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.