Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Sham Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jagmohan Bansal, J.
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 28.01.2025 (Annexure P-10) whereby respondent has enhanced punishment awarded by Disciplinary Authority.
2. The petitioner joined Punjab Police as Constable on 19.05.1989. He, from time to time, came to be promoted. In 2020, he was holding local rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector. He, while posted at Police Post Sun City Turn, Police Station Mohkampura, District Amritsar, in the course of his official duty stopped one vehicle which was being driven by a minor. He checked storage box of the two-wheeler and found two condoms. Father of the minor child reached there and scolded his son. After 2-3 days, child committed suicide. The Department initiated proceedings against the petitioner which culminated in forfeiture of two increments with permanent effect. He unsuccessfully preferred appeal before the Appellate Authority. He further preferred appeal before the Government which came up for consideration before Home Secretary. The petitioner was seeking setting aside of forfeiture of two increments, however, Home Secretary without i
The imposition of dismissal as punishment for police officers is not absolute; discretion based on individual case circumstances and nature of the offence must be exercised, as upheld by Supreme Cour....
The Court affirmed that disciplinary authorities can enhance penalties without an appeal under Rule 29(d) of the CRPF Act, emphasizing the need for discipline in paramilitary forces.
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
