Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Termination Without Notice - Several sources emphasize that terminating a constable's service without prior notice or an opportunity to be heard is generally unlawful, especially when the procedure prescribed by rules or constitutional protections has not been followed. For instance, ["State of Jharkhand Through the Secretary, Home Department VS Jyotish Kumar Paswan, son of Sri Shital Paswan - Jharkhand"] states, Admittedly in this case notice has not been given to the appellant before holding that his appointment is irregular or unauthorised and ordering termination of his service, indicating that such action without notice is not sustainable. Similarly, ["INDHC_JHHC010181932014"] notes, serving any notice and without giving any opportunity of being petitioner was appointed as a Constable... and no opportunity of hearing were ever given, highlighting the requirement of due process before termination.
Lack of Chargesheet or Proper Inquiry - Several cases highlight that without a formal chargesheet or an adequate departmental inquiry, termination is arbitrary and violates principles of natural justice. ["State of Jharkhand Through the Secretary, Home Department VS Jyotish Kumar Paswan, son of Sri Shital Paswan - Jharkhand"] mentions, Only by issuing a show cause notice, this type of charge... cannot be proved, implying that a simple notice without a proper inquiry is insufficient. ["Manash Pratim Hazarika S/o- Late Rajat Hazarika vs State Of Assam - Gauhati"] states, While passing order of termination of services or cancellation of candidature for giving false information, the employer may take notice of special circumstances... but the actual procedure requires a chargesheet and opportunity for defense.
Termination Based on Allegations in FIR Without Chargesheet - Several references indicate that initiating disciplinary action solely based on FIR allegations, without a chargesheet or formal departmental proceedings, is inadequate. ["State of Jharkhand Through the Secretary, Home Department VS Jyotish Kumar Paswan, son of Sri Shital Paswan - Jharkhand"], ["JYOTISH KUMAR PASAWAN vs HOME DEPARTMENT - Jharkhand"], and ["Manash Pratim Hazarika S/o- Late Rajat Hazarika vs State Of Assam - Gauhati"] all underscore that FIRs alone do not suffice to justify termination; a formal chargesheet and inquiry are necessary to uphold fairness.
Punitive Nature of Termination Without Due Process - Many sources classify such termination as stigmatic or punitive if done without proper procedure. ["Manash Pratim Hazarika S/o- Late Rajat Hazarika vs State Of Assam - Gauhati"] remarks, the order of termination is a camouflage one and has been issued in colourable exercise of the power, and ["INDHC_JHHC010181932014"] notes, the notice of Termination from service, was punitive in nature. This underscores that dismissals based on unproved allegations or without proper process are vulnerable to judicial review.
Legal Principles and Judicial Precedents - The Supreme Court and High Courts have consistently held that dismissals or terminations without following due process, including notice, chargesheet, and opportunity to be heard, violate constitutional protections and established rules. ["Hanuman Ram (Deceased) S/o Shri Kishana Ram VS State Of Rajasthan - Rajasthan"] states, admittedly in this case notice has not been given... and the order of termination cannot be sustained, reaffirming the necessity of following proper procedures.
Analysis and Conclusion:The collective insights from the sources clearly establish that termination of a constable under Rule 19(2) without notice and without chargesheet or an opportunity for defense is generally unlawful and violates principles of natural justice. Such actions are considered stigmatic and punitive, requiring adherence to due process, including issuing a show-cause notice, providing an opportunity to be heard, and conducting a formal inquiry. Without these procedural safeguards, the termination is liable to be challenged and set aside by courts. Therefore, dismissing or terminating a constable solely based on FIR allegations, without following the prescribed disciplinary procedure, is not justified and contravenes established legal standards.
In the high-stakes world of law enforcement, where trust and integrity are paramount, disciplinary actions against police personnel can have profound consequences. Imagine a scenario where a constable faces sudden termination under Rule 19(2) based solely on allegations in a First Information Report (FIR), with no chargesheet filed and no prior notice or hearing. Is such an action legally sustainable? This question—termination of constable under rule 19(2) without notice on the allegation under an FIR where no chargesheet has been given—lies at the heart of many disputes in service law.
This blog post delves into the legal principles governing such terminations, drawing from key judgments and statutory requirements. While this provides general insights, it is not legal advice—consult a qualified lawyer for specific cases.
Generally, termination of a constable under Rule 19(2) without notice, relying only on FIR allegations absent a chargesheet, is not sustainable unless statutory provisions or principles of natural justice are explicitly met. Courts consistently emphasize that disciplinary proceedings demand a fair opportunity, including notice and a chance to respond, particularly for serious criminal allegations. Mohd. Yunus Khan VS State of U. P. - 2010 7 Supreme 970
As highlighted in a pivotal ruling, disciplinary action cannot be based solely on the existence of an FIR without a proper inquiry or chargesheet establishing the misconduct. Mohd. Yunus Khan VS State of U. P. - 2010 7 Supreme 970 This underscores that an FIR merely reports initial information of an offense—it does not prove guilt or misconduct.
The cornerstone of disciplinary actions in public service, especially for police constables, is the audi alteram partem rule—hear the other side. In the case under review, the appellant constable faced proceedings post-FIR, but no chargesheet or evidence was produced. The court ruled this breached natural justice, stating that disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, including notice and opportunity to be heard. Mohd. Yunus Khan VS State of U. P. - 2010 7 Supreme 970
This aligns with broader jurisprudence. For public servants, even registering an FIR requires caution. In one instance involving SC/ST Act allegations, the court held that an FIR against a public servant cannot be issued without a preliminary enquiry, which must establish a basis for such action. Bijender Singh vs State - 2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 9472 Here, a special court erred by directing FIR registration without awaiting an administrative enquiry that exonerated the officer, emphasizing procedural safeguards. Bijender Singh vs State - 2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 9472
An FIR initiates criminal investigation but holds no evidentiary weight for employment decisions until a chargesheet—filed after police investigation—establishes a prima facie case. Without it, termination is premature. The absence of a chargesheet or formal evidence linking the misconduct to the employee renders the disciplinary action arbitrary and potentially unlawful. Mohd. Yunus Khan VS State of U. P. - 2010 7 Supreme 970
Supporting cases reinforce this. In a challenge to termination without show-cause notice post-FIR (lodged prior to chargesheet), courts found the action invalid for denying hearing opportunities. JYOTISH KUMAR PASAWAN vs HOME DEPARTMENT Similarly, under Central Civil Services Rules, termination notices based on unverified impersonation allegations were scrutinized for lacking inquiry. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE & ORS. Vs NARENDRA LAL MEENA & ANR. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 46373
While strict procedure is the norm, exceptions exist for grave misconduct warranting immediate action, like suspension. Even then, the employee must be informed promptly and given a response chance. In cases where the misconduct is of such a serious nature that immediate action is necessary... the employee must be informed of the allegations and given an opportunity to respond at the earliest opportunity. Mohd. Yunus Khan VS State of U. P. - 2010 7 Supreme 970
For probationers, rules like Karnataka Civil Services (Probation) Rules differentiate: simple discharge under Rule 6(2) needs no formal enquiry, unlike misconduct termination under Rule 7. Discharge of probationers under Rule 6(2) does not require a formal enquiry, and a mere mention of misconduct does not render the order stigmatic. Sayad Imamsab Chimmad, S/o. Imamsab Chimmad vs State Of Karnataka - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 23752 However, for confirmed constables under Rule 19(2), higher safeguards apply.
In CRPF contexts, terminations for suppressing FIR details were quashed if stigmatic without hearing: the termination was not in accordance with the provisions of sub rule 2 of rule 25... and was stigmatic in nature without affording an opportunity of hearing. Suresh Kumar VS U. O. I. & Ors. - 2012 Supreme(J&K) 531
Criminal acquittals do not bar departmental action, but it requires independent evidence. One judgment notes employer's rights post-acquittal but stresses reliable evidence and adherence to natural justice. BISWANATH HAZRA VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL - 2007 Supreme(Cal) 441 Conversely, pending FIRs without chargesheets weaken termination grounds, as in a CRPF constable case where chargesheet filing was noted but procedure still scrutinized. Chandra Prakash Singh VS Union of India - 2015 Supreme(Jhk) 999
Suspension during inquiries is permissible if allegations are grave, to prevent witness influence, but not as a pretext for termination sans process. YUSUF AHMEDMIYA SHAIKH VS COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, SURAT CITY - 2005 Supreme(Guj) 480
For temporary services, terminations under specific rules (e.g., CCS Temporary Services Rule 5(1)) demand show-cause notices, even on serious allegations like impersonation. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE & ORS. Vs NARENDRA LAL MEENA & ANR. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 46373
To avoid judicial setbacks:- Issue a formal chargesheet with evidence before any termination. Mohd. Yunus Khan VS State of U. P. - 2010 7 Supreme 970- Provide notice of charges and a reasonable response period.- Conduct preliminary enquiries for public servants before FIRs. Bijender Singh vs State - 2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 9472- Distinguish probationary discharge from misconduct termination. Sayad Imamsab Chimmad, S/o. Imamsab Chimmad vs State Of Karnataka - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 23752
Employees facing such actions should challenge via writ petitions, citing natural justice violations. Authorities risk orders being quashed, with reinstatement and back wages. Union of India VS Dalbir Singh - 2021 6 Supreme 715 reinforces evidence-based proceedings over mere allegations.
Termination under Rule 19(2) on FIR alone, without chargesheet or notice, typically falters against natural justice mandates. Courts protect public servants from arbitrary actions, ensuring fairness amid serious allegations. Key takeaway: Procedure is not mere formality—it's constitutional bedrock.
References:1. Mohd. Yunus Khan VS State of U. P. - 2010 7 Supreme 970: Core case on FIR-based termination invalidity.2. Union of India VS Dalbir Singh - 2021 6 Supreme 715: Evidence requirements in disciplinary matters.3. Bijender Singh vs State - 2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 9472: Preliminary enquiry for public servant FIRs.4. Others as cited for procedural insights.
Stay informed, act judiciously—fair process benefits all in the justice system.
#ConstableTermination, #NaturalJustice, #PoliceDisciplinary
A First Information Report was also lodged with the aforesaid allegation on 02.11.2012. ... 2. The writ petitioner was appointed as Constable in Chatra District on 31.12.2011. He was sent for training. ... Writ petitioner-respondent was served with a notice with an allegation that at the time of selection, he had not appeared in the Physical Test, rather someone impersonating him with connivance of others to help him getting the appointment, had appeared. ... Appellants in this case h....
of the case which is clear violation of Rule 7(1) of SC/ST Rule 1995. ... Vide Order dated 15.04.2020, notice was issued in this petition to respondent nos. 1 and 2 and it was further ordered that the impugned order directing the registration of the FIR against the appellant shall remain stayed till further orders. ... A complaint was made by the complainant against the Constable Rajini and her husband Constable Vikas Yadav over a dispute of parking when their scoot....
38.2. While passing order of termination of services or cancellation of candidature for giving false information, the employer may take notice of special circumstances of the case, if any, while giving such information. ... hard and fast rule of thumb can be laid down in this regard.” ... 2. ... It also reflects that the appointee has to furnish a signed undertaking/affidavit, thereby declaring that voluntarily and without duress agreed to the terms and conditions of the appointment ....
serving any notice and without giving any opportunity of being petitioner was appointed as a Constable at Chatra District petitioners and no opportunity of hearing were ever given ... In this regard, an F.I.R. was also lodged on 02.11.2012; prior to issuance of charge-sheet. ... any show-cause notice; as such the action of the respondents are p style="position:absolute;white-space:pre;margin:0;padding:
Without holding any further inquiry into the matter, the petitioners issued a notice of Termination of Service dated 05.03.2025, under Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Services) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules’), thereby terminating the services of the respondent ... As reproduced hereinabove, the Show Cause Notice was issued on the allegation that the respondent no. 1 had impersonated for four other candidates by appearing in their examinations, wh....
(2) While passing order of termination of services or cancellation of candidature for giving false information, the employer may take notice of special circumstances of the case, if any, while giving such information ... as Constable Driver. ... While passing order of termination of services or cancellation of candidature for giving false information, the employer may take notice of special circumstances of the case, if any, while giving such information. ... Kapil Kumar Meena was “no....
(2) While passing order of termination of services or cancellation of candidature for giving false information, the employer may take notice of special circumstances of the case, if any, while giving such information ... It is not known whether the said FIR is still pending and any chargesheet is filed therein, in the meanwhile. ... 2. ... While passing order of termination of services or cancellation of candidature for giving false information, the....
It is relevant to notice Rule 7 of the KCS (Probation) Rules which deals with termination for misconduct. Rule 7 reads as follows:- “7. Termination for misconduct. ... It is relevant to notice that Rule 7 provides for termination on the ground of misconduct and in case of such termination, the procedure under the KCS (CCA) Rules requires to be followed. 36. ... Rule 7 mandates that an order terminating the services....
Counsel for the appellant submitted that no notice has been given, no chargesheet has been given, no procedure has been followed and hence, the order of termination of services of this appellant dated 31st August, 2013 deserves to be quashed and set aside. ... The allegation levelled against this appellant is under Sections 147, 452, 308, 323, 325, 504, 506 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code at Ballia Police Station. The chargesheet has also been filed in this case. .......
The underlying presumption in Rule 19 is that dismissal, removal of a person employed in a State service is not to be taken lightly or done without following due process. ... Admittedly in this case notice has not been given to the appellant before holding that his appointment is irregular or unauthorised and ordering termination of his service. Hence the impugned order terminating the services of the appellant cannot be sustained. 14. ... Dasayan (1998) 2 SCC 407, wh....
The owner is required to be put to notice as to what action is contemplated by the Corporation with regard to the fixation of rateable value. As we have already observed, the requirement of giving a special notice under Rule 15(2) incorporates one of the cardinal principles of natural justice. The public notice under Rule 13 would merely state that the entries in the assessment book have been completed and the same is open for inspection. In the case of new properties, where rateable value has been increased, special notice must be given under Rule 15(2).
In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court dealt with the settlement of the year 1974 as between the LIC and its employees. In that context, the Hon'ble Supreme Court examined the question as to the effect of expiry of a settlement as also the effect of a purported termination of the settlement. By relying on this judgment, Mr.V.Prakash contended that the award or settlement does not become non-est after the contractual period and continues to be binding. A notice of termination had been issued under Section 19(2) of the ID Act.
9. In the basic termination order, Commandant has not stated that petitioner is not fit for permanent appointment. The order of termination, which has been maintained by the appellate authority, would also not survive for the reason that petitioner has been termi#31;nated from the service on the allegation that he has suppressed the information that FIR was registered against him, while seeking employment. The order of termination which has been maintained by the appellate authority would not survive, in view of the plain language contained in sub rule 2 of rule 25 of rules of 2001. #HL_STAR....
6. 88 under section 448/354/376 IPC based on all the evidence like the seizure list, the FSL report. Thus charge of outraging of the female modesty and committing rape upon Kumari Asha baidya who was 14 years old at that time and hence as per record and as per law incapable of giving consent to voluntary sexual intercourse is also proved beyond doubt. The chargesheet submitted against the delinquent constable vide chargesheet No. 56 dated 17.
As far as the averment that another Police Constable, to whom the very same chargesheet has been given has not been suspended and that the present appellant also should not be suspended, has no substance. ( 12 ) MR. DESAI, learned AGP, has also relied upon the decision in the case of Atulkumar T. Jadwani V. Deputy Inspector general of Police, Junagadh, reported in 1989 (1) GLR 494, wherein this Court has observed as under in paragraph 4, 5 and 6 :4. The averment in the chargesheet as regards the appellant is concerned is grave enough to take action by the authorities concer....
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
