31 Aug 2023
Order issued
ConcludedThe Calcutta High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: WP.ST 508 of 2013
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2023-0025Malda, West BengalJudgment 31 August 2023
The State of West Bengal & Ors. Versus Kolkata Police Police Constable
Calcutta Police constable was dismissed from service following Departmental Proceeding No. 110 of 1999 for unauthorized absence from duty, failing to report his implication in a criminal case, and involvement in the murder of a Ratua man under Ratua Police Station in Malda on 9 February 1994. Although Roy was subsequently acquitted in the criminal trial (Sessions Trial No. 1(4) of 2008), the Commissioner of Police rejected his reinstatement plea under Regulation 4, Chapter XIX of the Police Regulations of Calcutta. The West Bengal Administrative Tribunal quashed the dismissal, but the Calcutta High Court allowed the State's writ petition and set aside the Tribunal's order. The High Court held that acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically bar disciplinary punishment or mandate reinstatement, as the standards of proof and scope of charges differ, thereby restoring the constable's dismissal from service. 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 31 August 2023 in WP.ST 508 of 2013, the Calcutta High Court (Coram: Debangsu Basak, Md. Shabbar Rashidi, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Police Constable, Kolkata Police.
- Register number
- WB 65 CW 0001
- Case reference
- WP.ST 508 of 2013
- Court and date
- Calcutta High Court (Coram: Debangsu Basak, Md. Shabbar Rashidi, JJ.), 31 August 2023
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police Constable, Kolkata Police
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as dismissed from service.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 456 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 329 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959; Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959; Regulation of Calcutta 1968 Chapter XIX Regulation 4 of the Police Regulations; Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Therefore, in the light of discussions made hereinbefore, the impugned order passed by the tribunal in O.A. 1275 of 2012 is liable to be set aside. We accordingly, set aside the impugned order passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal.” (at para 35)
- 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 31 August 2023 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.
“Therefore, in the light of discussions made hereinbefore, the impugned order passed by the tribunal in O.A. 1275 of 2012 is liable to be set aside. We accordingly, set aside the impugned order passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal.” (para 35)
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.