Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, ASHA MENON
Sobendra Bhadana (EX CT) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges multiple disciplinary orders. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. no strong evidence of guilt presented by the petitioner. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. judicial review of sfc findings is limited. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. evidence supports charges; removal punishment justified. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. petition dismissed due to lack of merits. (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Present writ petition has been filed challenging orders dated 07/08/2019 (conviction order), 2nd January, 2020 (order of appellate authority) and 14th May, 2020 (order in revision) as well as the Summary Force Court [SFC] proceedings. Petitioner also prays for a direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service from the date of his removal and grant him all the consequential benefits.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that the petitioner, who was a Constable (GD) in Sashastra Seema Bal [SSB], while performing his duties in Panchayat election-2018 at Udhampur (J&K) in the intervening date of 20.11.2018 and 21.11.2018 at about 2315 to 0100 hrs misbehaved with the civilians at the counting place as well as his senior officers and used threatening language wit
Judicial review of disciplinary actions is limited; removal from service upheld due to substantial evidence of misconduct involving assault on a senior officer, with the court emphasizing adherence t....
The court emphasized the importance of maintaining discipline in a disciplined force and upheld the conviction and removal from service based on overwhelming evidence of misconduct.
The court quashed the enhanced penalty of removal from service, holding that the charges of misconduct were not proved, emphasizing reliability issues in witness testimonies.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of adherence to relevant statutory provisions and principles of natural justice in proceedings related to sexual misconduct allegations.
As per Rule 27(a) of Rules of 1949, punishment of dismissal or removal from service including that of reduction to a lower stage in time scale of pay for a specific period can be imposed by Commandan....
Summary Security Force Court proceedings must be conducted with due process, but admissions of guilt by the petitioners validated their dismissals despite procedural irregularities.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of the proportionality of the penalty imposed in relation to the established misconduct of the petitioner.
Disciplinary authorities can impose removal from service for proven serious misconduct; past penalties may be considered, but each case must adhere to procedural standards without arbitrary penalties....
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
