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

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 234

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
MUKESH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent


459 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

****

Date of Decision: 12.01.2026

Mukesh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and Others

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Present:- Mr. Aditya Yadav, Advocate and

Ms. Hemlata, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Ravi Partap Singh, DAG, Haryana.

****

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of orders passed by Departmental Authorities whereby he was awarded punishment

of forfeiture of four increments with permanent effect.

2. The petitioner was enrolled as Constable on 20.06.1974. He was promoted as Assistant Sub Inspector (ASI) w.e.f. 03.12.1996. He was implicated in FIR No.120 dated 15.07.2003 registered under Sections 452, 448, 511, 427, 147 and 148 of IPC at Police Station Rajaund. He was suspended w.e.f. 21.10.2003. He was subjected to departmental inquiry wherein he was found guilty. He was awarded punishment of forfeiture of four increments with permanent effect. He preferred appeal which came to be dismissed. The allegation in the FIR was that he in uniform visited a village without authorization and interve

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top