CW-2025-0047Sirsa, HaryanaJudgment 23 September 2025

Haryana Police ex-Constable and others vs State of Haryana and Others

The judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court records the following account. [name withheld] and colleagues were implicated in FIR No. 62 dated 25 March 2001 and convicted on 26 October 2012 under Sections 323, 342, 167 and 34 IPC with three years rigorous imprisonment, being acquitted of the murder charge, and were dismissed on 16 November 2012. The High Court held that no punishment other than dismissal can be awarded where an enrolled police officer is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment exceeding one month under Rule 16.2(2) of the Punjab Police Rules. The court rejected the plea for conversion of dismissal into compulsory retirement on parity with a co-accused and dismissed the writ, so the dismissal stands while the criminal appeals remain pending.

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 →

Report card

By judgment dated 23 September 2025 in CWP-14996-2025 (common order also disposes CWP-23420-2025), the Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Jagmohan Bansal, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against 3 police personnel, namely: ex-Constable, Haryana Police; ex-Sub-Inspector, Haryana Police; ex-Head Constable, Haryana Police.

Register number
HR 24 CW 0001
Case reference
CWP-14996-2025 (common order also disposes CWP-23420-2025)
Court and date
Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Jagmohan Bansal, J.), 23 September 2025
Officer(s) at the material time
ex-Constable, Haryana Police; ex-Sub-Inspector, Haryana Police; ex-Head Constable, Haryana Police
Present service status
Recorded in the cited sources as compulsorily retired.
Provisions invoked
Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 167 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Finding of the Court (extract)
“The respondent cannot award punishment other than dismissal from service where an enrolled Police officer has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment exceeding one month.” (at para 37)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Disciplinary action upheld. Sentence: dismissal.
Present status of the proceedings
The judgment is recent and may be subject to appeal; the pendency of an appeal is not a finding.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

Judgment dated 23 September 2025. This judgment may still be subject to appeal; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.

Recorded allegations

1
Custodial torturePrimary
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.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“The respondent cannot award punishment other than dismissal from service where an enrolled Police officer has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment exceeding one month.” (para 37)

Institutional response

1
23 Sep 2025

Order issued

Concluded
Punjab and Haryana High Court External · Binding

The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.

Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: CWP-14996-2025 (common order also disposes CWP-23420-2025)
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
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.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.