Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
AMRITA SINHA
Karamveer Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
AMRITA SINHA, J.
1. The petitioner was serving as a constable in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF). A major penalty charge sheet under Rule 36 of CISF Rules, 2001 was issued against him on 25th January, 2023. After conducting a disciplinary proceeding, the petitioner was removed from service on 4th May, 2023. An appeal was preferred before the appellate authority who affirmed the order of the disciplinary authority. A petition for revision was filed thereafter, which also stood rejected.
2. The charge against the petitioner was that he consumed liquor while on duty and was found under the influence of liquor. Breath analyser test was conducted to ascertain consumption of liquor. The same was found positive. Consuming liquor while he was on duty has been held to be an act of indiscipline and unbecoming of a member of the disciplined Force. Due to such indisciplined act, he was sent back to his unit for which he could not complete the rotational training and thus failed to perform his duty and the responsibility assigned to him. Such act was held to be disobedience of lawful order, dereliction of duty and unbecoming of a disciplined member of the armed Force.
3. Fur
The court emphasized the importance of maintaining discipline in an armed force and upheld the disciplinary authority's decision based on the evidence presented during the proceedings.
The proportionality of punishment in disciplinary proceedings and the consideration of previous misconduct in determining the appropriate punishment.
The judgment emphasized the importance of complying with the rules of natural justice, evidence-based findings of misconduct, and the proportionality of punishment in disciplinary proceedings.
The High Court does not act as an appellate authority in disciplinary matters and will not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless it is shocking to the conscience.
The penalty of removal from service for intoxication while on duty is justified as it constitutes gross indiscipline, affirming the primacy of the Disciplinary Authority's discretion in such matters.
The judgment emphasizes the limited scope of judicial review in disciplinary proceedings, the need for evidence to reasonably support the conclusion of guilt, and the requirement for the penalty to b....
Adequate opportunity for defense in disciplinary inquiry is essential; however, failure to contest charges undermines claims of procedural violations.
In disciplinary proceedings, the principles of natural justice require that the person facing the charges should be given a fair opportunity to defend himself, including the right to cross-examine wi....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
