18 Aug 2022
Order issued
ConcludedThe Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: CWP No. 18431 of 2018 (O&M)
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2022-0016Faridabad, HaryanaJudgment 18 August 2022
Haryana Police Exemptee Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State of Haryana and Others
The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed CWP 18431 of 2018 and upheld the dismissal of EASI [name withheld] of Faridabad, trapped by the Vigilance Department on 11 July 2011 accepting eight marked Rs 500 notes from complainant [name withheld]. The Court found a shadow witness watched the exchange, tainted notes were recovered from his pocket, and his hand-wash turned pink, leading DCP HQ Faridabad to dismiss him on 4 July 2013 after a regular enquiry. Though the Special Judge acquitted him in 2016 after the complainant turned hostile, the Court held the departmental proof stood and Rule 16.3 bar did not apply where witnesses were won over. The appeal, revision and mercy petition rejections were left undisturbed.
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 18 August 2022 in CWP No. 18431 of 2018 (O&M), the Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Jaishree Thakur, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Exemptee Assistant Sub-Inspector, Haryana Police, Faridabad.
- Register number
- HR 29 CW 0004
- Case reference
- CWP No. 18431 of 2018 (O&M)
- Court and date
- Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Jaishree Thakur, J.), 18 August 2022
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Exemptee Assistant Sub-Inspector, Haryana Police, Faridabad
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The departmental authorities took into account the fact that there was recovery of tainted currency notes from the petitioner, shadow witness supported the case and the hands of the petitioner when washed with sodium carbonate solution turned pink which would …” (at para 10)
- 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 18 August 2022 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 departmental authorities took into account the fact that there was recovery of tainted currency notes from the petitioner, shadow witness supported the case and the hands of the petitioner when washed with sodium carbonate solution turned pink which would …” (para 10)
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.