Court affirms the Director General of Police's authority to dismiss convicted personnel without inquiry under Article 311(2)(a) of the Constitution.
In a landmark judgment delivered on July 29, 2026, the Himachal Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, upheld the dismissal of two police constables, Gaurav Verma and Lakshay Chauhan, who were convicted under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The court ruled that the Director General of Police was within his rights to dismiss the officers without holding a departmental inquiry under Article 311(2)(a) of the Constitution of India, which allows for such action on the grounds of conduct leading to a criminal conviction.
The case emerged from two separate incidents where the constables were implicated in drug-related offenses. Gaurav Verma was convicted for possession of charas weighing 1003 grams, while Lakshay Chauhan faced charges under multiple sections of the NDPS Act. Despite the suspension of their sentences pending appeal, the court noted that their convictions stood, justifying their dismissal from the police force.
The petitioners challenged their dismissals, arguing that the Director General of Police was not the competent authority and that the dismissal orders violated the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel. However, the court found that under the Punjab Police Rules, as applicable to Himachal Pradesh, the Director General of Police, being an officer of higher rank, was authorized to impose the penalty of dismissal.
Justice Goel emphasized that the disciplinary authority is required to consider whether the conduct leading to a government servant’s conviction warrants dismissal. The court found that the offenses committed by the petitioners were of a grave nature, involving the very law they were tasked to uphold, thus justifying their removal from service. The judgment underscored that the suspension of a sentence in appeal does not equate to a suspension of conviction, and the disciplinary action taken was both appropriate and necessary to maintain public trust in the police force.
The decision reinforces the legal framework allowing disciplinary authorities to act decisively in cases involving criminal convictions, especially within disciplined forces like the police, where public confidence is paramount. The High Court’s ruling supports the notion that maintaining the integrity and reputation of law enforcement agencies is crucial and that officers convicted of criminal activities cannot be shielded from dismissal, notwithstanding pending appeals.
Bottom Line :
Disciplinary Authority can dismiss a government servant convicted on criminal charges without holding an inquiry under Article 311(2)(a) of the Constitution of India, provided the conviction is not stayed and the conduct warrants such dismissal.
Statutory provision(s): Article 311 of the Constitution of India, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, Punjab Police Rules, 1934, Himachal Pradesh Police Act, 2007
Gaurav Verma v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (Himachal Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc id # 2950070
