10 Jul 2026
Order issued
ConcludedThe Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: 2026:MPHC-JBP:50818
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2026-0051Burhanpur, Madhya PradeshJudgment 10 July 2026
District Police Constable (Driver) vs State of Madhya Pradesh
The judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court records the following account. [name withheld] was selected as Constable (Driver) in Burhanpur and disclosed a criminal case in his attestation form, but his affidavit dated 23 April 2018 suppressed that his acquittal in the rioting/brick-pelting case was on benefit of doubt rather than honourable. The screening committee held him unsuitable for service and he was removed in November 2018; the departmental appeal was dismissed in November 2019. Applying the Avtar Singh objective test, the court held partial disclosure with suppression of the non-honourable acquittal amounts to moral turpitude under the State instructions. It held removal proportionate for a member of a disciplined force and dismissed the petition. 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 10 July 2026 in WP No. 10511 of 2019, the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Coram: Deepak Khot, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable (Driver), District Police, Burhanpur.
- Register number
- MP 68 CW 0001
- Case reference
- WP No. 10511 of 2019 / 2026:MPHC-JBP:50818
- Court and date
- Madhya Pradesh High Court (Coram: Deepak Khot, J.), 10 July 2026
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable (Driver), District Police, Burhanpur
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 332 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 333 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 506-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The authority considering the same has found that such suppression in regard to acquittal does not fall within the category of clean or honourable acquittal and therefore, it is not expected from the member of the disciplined force to show …” (at para 26)
- 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.
Current position
Judgment dated 10 July 2026. This judgment may still be subject to appeal; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
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 authority considering the same has found that such suppression in regard to acquittal does not fall within the category of clean or honourable acquittal and therefore, it is not expected from the member of the disciplined force to show …” (para 26)
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.