Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955

21 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusDILER SINGH

2016 INSC 47930 June 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Constable Oiler Singh of the CRPF left his camp without permission, consumed alcohol and quarrelled with civilians. The disciplinary authority dismissed him under Section 11(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949. Singh filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that the dismissal was illegal; the trial court s

BOBINDRA KUMAR & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 96627 August 2019Dismissed

The case concerned seniority of Sub‑Inspectors (General Duty) in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). Direct recruits were selected through a 2007 advertisement, allotted to units on 5 October 2009 and issued offer letters in mid‑October 2009, reporting for training in January 2010. Promotee Sub‑Inspectors were app

SATISH CHANDRA YADAVversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2022 INSC 102426 September 2022Dismissed

The appellants, Satish Chandra Yadav and Pushpendra Kumar Yadav, were dismissed from the CRPF while on probation after it was discovered that they had answered "No" to questions about pending criminal cases in the verification Form-25, despite an FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings against them. The Supreme Court h

DAYA SHANKAR YADAVversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2010 INSC 80924 November 2010Dismissed

The appellant, Daya Shankar Yadav, was appointed as a constable in the Central Reserve Police Force in 2003. In the verification roll he filled in July 2004, he answered ‘no’ to questions asking whether he had ever been arrested, prosecuted, detained, fined or convicted, despite a criminal case having been registered a

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusP. THAYAGARAJAN

1998 INSC 44024 November 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Sub‑Inspector of the CRPF, was charged with disobeying transfer orders, neglect of duty and misconduct. During the departmental enquiry, the Enquiry Officer treated letters from two witnesses—one for the department and one for the respondent—as oral statements, despite the witnesses’ inability to appe

KANAILAL BERAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 97324 September 2007Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a constable in the Central Reserve Police Force, was repeatedly disciplined for unauthorized absence, culminating in dismissal after a departmental inquiry found some charges partially proved. He challenged the dismissal, but his appeal and subsequent writ petition were dismissed due to long delay. The S

UNION OF INDIA AND ANRversusS.S. AHLUWALIA

2007 INSC 86524 August 2007Case Partly allowed

S.S. Ahluwalia, a CRPF officer, applied for voluntary retirement effective 1 July 1993; the request was initially rejected but later accepted on 23 February 1994 and he was relieved on 2 March 1994. While his retirement was pending, disciplinary proceedings were continued and resulted in a penalty of 10% deduction from

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusAMAR SINGH

2007 INSC 118323 November 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Amar Singh, a constable in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), was found after 29 years of service to have entered the force using a fictitious school leaving certificate. A departmental enquiry confirmed the fraud, leading to his dismissal under Section 11(1) of the CRPF Act, 1949 and Rule 27 of the CRPF Rules, 1

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusGULAM MOHD. BHAT

2005 INSC 51120 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Gulam Mohd. Bhat, a constable in the Central Reserve Police Force, overstayed his sanctioned leave by 315 days. The competent authority initiated departmental proceedings and, invoking Section 11(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 and Rule 27 of the 1955 Rules, ordered his removal from service. Bhat chall

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusR.C. DSOUZA

1987 INSC 5720 February 1987Appeal(s) allowed

R.C.D. Souza, a retired Indian Army officer, was recruited as an Assistant Commandant in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) under Rule 105(3‑A) and later promoted on a temporary basis to Commandant. In 1976 he was informed that, under the then‑applicable Rule 107(2) of the CRPF Rules, he was not eligible for perma

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusS.S. GILL

2007 INSC 76519 July 2007Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Short Service Commissioned Officers transferred from the Army to the CRPF could have their previous Army service counted for seniority under Rule 8(b)(i) of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955. The Union of India argued that the rule does not allow such counting, while the of

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusCONST SUNIL KUMAR

2023 INSC 5519 January 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Constable Sunil Kumar of the CRPF was found to have consumed liquor and threatened senior officers, an act of insubordination and misconduct. After a departmental enquiry, the disciplinary authority dismissed him under Section 11 of the CRPF Act, 1949, following Rule 27 of the CRPF Rules, 1955, and the dismissal was co

ANGAD DASversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2010 INSC 11118 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Angad Das, a constable in the Central Reserve Police Force, was compulsorily retired in 1996 after an enquiry found his date of birth to be false. He wrote a humble letter to the DIG requesting re‑employment on compassionate grounds, but the DIG treated the letter as an appeal under Rule 28 of the CRPF Rules and enhanc

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusBASHIRBHAI R. KHILIJI

2007 INSC 60016 May 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a constable in the Central Reserve Police Force, was invalidated after contracting pyogenic meningitis and suffering bilateral deafness while on duty. He applied for an invalid pension but was denied on the ground that he had not completed the ten years of qualifying service required under the Central C

SMT. KANTA DEVIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2003 INSC 17512 March 2003Disposed off

The appellant, Kanta Devi, challenged the dismissal of her husband, a Subedar (Inspector) of the CRPF, which was ordered by the Deputy Inspector General (DIG) under the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955. The High Court had quashed the dismissal, holding that prior approval of the Inspector General (IG) was requi

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusEX. CONSTABLE RAM KARAN

2021 INSC 71511 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Constable Ram Karan of the CRPF assaulted a doctor and falsely accused him of sexual harassment. A departmental inquiry under Rule 27 of the CRPF Rules found the charges proved and imposed removal from service, which was affirmed by the appellate and revisional authorities. The Delhi High Court substituted the removal

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSITARAM MISHRA AND ANR.

2019 INSC 74911 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a constable of the CRPF, was dismissed after a disciplinary enquiry found him guilty of misconduct for carelessly handling his loaded 9 mm carbine, which discharged eight rounds and killed a fellow constable. The same incident led to a criminal trial under Section 304 IPC, from which the respondent was a

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusCHETAN JEFF

2022 INSC 55611 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan recruited constables and the petitioner, Chetan Jeff, applied claiming no criminal antecedents, while a pending FIR under Sections 143, 341 and 336 IPC existed. The recruitment authority rejected his candidature for suppressing this material fact and making a false declaration. The petitioner cha

R.C. SAHI AND ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 41810 November 1998Dismissed

The petitioners, former Emergency Commissioned Officers (ECOs) in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), challenged the seniority list prepared by the Union of India, alleging that the list improperly accounted for their past Army service. The Court examined whether the 1967 Rules on ECOs applied to seniority matters

SANJAY KUMAR SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 6546 September 2011Dismissed

Four CRPF personnel survived an ambush on 13 March 1999 in which five members of their escort vehicle were killed. They were charged with disobedience of orders, gross misconduct and cowardice, and a departmental inquiry found them guilty, leading to their dismissal. The appellants challenged the inquiry on grounds of

RAM SARANversusI.G. OF POLICE, CRPF AND ORS.

2006 INSC 662 February 2006Dismissed

Ram Saran was appointed as a Constable in the Central Reserve Police Force by falsifying his date of birth on a school certificate. After 27 years of service, a departmental enquiry found him guilty of furnishing false information to secure appointment, a violation of Section 11(1) of the CRPF Act and Rule 14 of the CC

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search