Mere Incarceration In Criminal Case Without Conviction Can't Be Ground To Remove CISF Personnel From Service: Allahabad High Court

A division bench of the Allahabad High Court recently upheld the Single Judge order quashing termination order of a CISF Head Constable who was accused of murder and was incarcerated for a small period on grounds that disciplinary proceedings could not be initiated merely on grounds of his incarceration.The bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Rajeev Bharti held,“we are of the opinion that there was absolutely no basis for initiation of the disciplinary proceedings and issuance of chargesheet to the respondent/petitioner merely because of his incarceration in respect of a criminal case, nor was there any factual or legal basis for removing the applicant from service on the said count.”Petitioner was working as Head Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force. In 2019, an FIR was lodged against him under Sections 302, 201, 120-B I.P.C. and he was in jail. After being enlarged on bail, he requested joining in services but was put under suspension under Sub rule 2 of Rule 33 of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001. Petitioner was eventually terminated from service on account of his involvement in a criminal case. Petitioner challenged this order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Court set aside the termination order holding that the very initiation of disciplinary proceedings for imposing punishment of removal was without any factual and legal basis. This order was challenged by the Union of India in special appeal. The Court noted that Section 8 (i) of the C.I.S.F.Act, 1968 provides for Dismissal, removal, etc., of members of the Force on grounds that the supervisory officer thinks that such member is remiss or negligent or unfit for duty. This provision is subject to Article 311 of the Constitution of India which provides for Dismissal, removal or reduction in rank of persons employed in civil capacities under the Union or a State.The Court observed that the Single Judge had noted that the only charge against the petitioner was that he was incarcerated. It noted that the trial is still pending and the petitioner has not been convicted. “It is therefore, unthinkable as to how, at the stage of initiation of disciplinary proceedings or passing of the removal order, any authority whether it be the supervisory officer or the disciplinary authority could have formed any opinion based merely on the incarceration of the respondent/ petitioner in respect of a criminal case and his alleged involvement therein, even if the offence was of a heinous nature, that he was remiss or negligent in the discharge of his duties or unfit for the same.”The Court held that it was unthinkable as to how without any conviction or observation in the trail, the conclusion could be drawn that the petitioner had not maintained absolute integrity and devotion in service. It was held that the termination was based on mere presumptions without any factual or legal basis. Since the petitioner had attained the age of superannuation, the Court held that he could remain suspended during the course of the trial. However, the Court left the decision of payment of dues and post retiral benefits on the competent authority in accordance with the rules applicable. Case Title: Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Home Affairs C.g.o. Complax New Delhi and 4 others v. Vijay Kumar Pandey 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 2 [SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 384 of 2025]Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 2Click Here To Read/Download Order

Mere Incarceration In Criminal Case Without Conviction Can't Be Ground To Remove CISF Personnel From Service: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

Tags