SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6377

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Anil Kshetarpal, Amit Mahajan, JJ
Manish Kumar Upadhyay – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
W.P.(C) 5429/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Bhanu Gupta
For the Respondents: Ms Shivani Luthra Lohiya, Mr. Nitin Saluja, Ms. Vasudha Singh, Mr. Ajay Pal

Judicial review of disciplinary proceedings is limited to assessing procedural fairness and legality. Courts do not re-appreciate evidence or interfere with punishment unless the decision is perverse, violates principles of natural justice, or the penalty imposed is shockingly disproportionate to the proven misconduct.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Judicial review - Disciplinary proceedings - Scope - Interference limited to procedural illegality, perversity, or violation of principles of natural justice. (Para 14)

(B) Service Law - Disciplinary proceedings - Misconduct - Suppression of material facts - Concealment of criminal charges and arrest by an employee violates core values of integrity and discipline. (Para 16)

(C) Evidence - Admission of guilt - Where an employee admits to charges of misconduct, and inquiry follows due process, judicial interference is unwarranted unless the penalty is shockingly disproportionate. (Paras 19, 20)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a member of a disciplined force, overstayed his leave, submitted false information during his absence, and failed to disclose his arrest in a criminal case to his superiors. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated, resulting in the petitioner's removal from service following a finding of guilt by the internal inquiry.

Findings of Court:
The court determined that the disciplinary procedure was conducted fairly and that the petitioner’s suppression of material facts and unauthorized absence constituted serious misconduct. The court held that it cannot act as an appellate authority to re-appreciate evidence when charges strike at the core of the integrity of the force.

Issues: Whether the removal of an employee from service for unauthorized absence and non-disclosure of criminal involvement is legally sustainable, and whether the court should interfere with the decision regarding the quantum of punishment.

Ratio Decidendi: Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited to assessing the process; where guilt is admitted or supported by records, and the misconduct involves the integrity of a member of a disciplined force, the court shall not interfere with the penalty unless it is shockingly disproportionate.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. procedural history and factual background leading to termination from service. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
2. parties' contentions regarding proportionality of punishment and natural justice. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
3. judicial review scope and the weight of misconduct (concealment/false information). (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
4. finality of disciplinary findings when misconduct undermines force integrity. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

AMIT MAHAJAN, J.

1. The present Petition has been filed assailing the impugned orders dated 22.03.2024, 22.02.2025 and 23.09.2025, passed during the disciplinary proceedings conducted against the Petitioner herein, vide which he was held guilty of the charges imposed and consequently removed from service.

2. Succinctly stated, the Petitioner was appointed in the Central Reserve Police Force (‘CRPF’) on 25.08.2011 to the post of Constable/GD.

3. On 01.06.2023, the Petitioner was arrested in FIR No. 256/2023 registered at Police Station Chaubepur, Varanasi, under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and was sent to judicial custody. Hence, on 02.09.2023, the Commandant-70 BN CRPF, proposed to initiate inquiry against the Petitioner and a memorandum of charge was issued upon him, details of which are reproduced herein below: -

“Details of the charges levelled against Bal no 110727137 Constable Manish Kumar Upadhyay (G/70 Bn)

Item – ONE

That Bal No 110727137 Constable /Manish Kumar Upadhyay (G/70 Bn), while working as a Constable/GD in the CRPF, being a member of the Force Under Section 11(1) of the CRPF Act 1949, has committed disobedience of orders/neglect of his duty/laxity in the discharge of his duty/other misconduct or misbehavior. In this, form 06/04/2023 until now, he has remained absent from duty of his own volition without the permission of any competent authority, misguided the force by giving wrong information to the department and submitting an application for extension of leaves on the basis of false facts, which is against the good conduct/behavior of the force as a disciplined force member.

Item – TWO

That Bal No Constable/GD Manish Kumar Upadhyay (Gn/70 Bn), while working as a Constable/GD in the CRPF being a member of the Force Under Section 11 (1) of the CRPF Act 1949, has committed disobedience of orders/neglect of his duty/laxity in the discharge of his duty/other misconduct or misbehavior. The personnel has been informed under letter number Reader/SHO (Prosecution Sanction)/2023 dated 01/08/2023 from the office of Police Station- Chaubepur Commissioneraate Varanasi that he has been arrested under registered Case Crime No 256/2023 Under Section 302 at the local police station and sent to judicial custody. The personnel did not inform the force about the arrest and concealed the facts from the department. Due to this act of the personnel, the image of the force has been tarnished. This unseemly act is against the good conduct/behavior of the force as a disciplined force member.

(Tashi Gayalik) Commandant-70 Battalion CRPF”

4. The “details of accusation of disobedience/neglect of duty/laxity in performance of duty or other misconduct as a member of the force”, issued upon the Petitioner are reproduced herein below: -

“Discription of the imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour in support of the charges leveled against Bal No 110727137 Constable/GD/10 Bn

Item- ONE

That is to say that Bal No. 110727137 Constable/GD Manish Kumar Upadhyay (GD/10 Bn) while working as a Constable/GD being a member of the Force under Section 11(1) of the CRPF Act 1949, committed disobedience of orders/neglect of his duty/laxity in the discharge of his duty/other misconduct or misbehavior Bal No.110727137 Constable/GD Manish Kumar Upadhyay was on 15 days casual leave from 16/03/2023 to 05/04/2023 (including permission dated 30/03/2023 & 04/04/2023,GH 22/03/2023 , RA 19/03/2023, 28/03/2023 & 02/04/2023 and Sunday ). After the leave expired, the perso

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top