SHAILENDER KUMAR vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~68 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 515/2024 SHAILENDER KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. K.K. Sharma and Mr. Harshit Agarwal, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Neeraj, Sr. PC with Mr. Soumyadip Chakraborty, Adv. for UOI with Mr. Arshdeep Singh Randhawa, (Legal Officer) RAF CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 13.10.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. The petitioner stands dismissed from service by order dated 27 February 2023, passed by the Commandant 114th Battalion Jalandhar, Rapid Action Force1. An appeal, and subsequently a revision petition, preferred thereagainst, stand dismissed on 19 May 2023 and 23 November 2023. All three orders are assailed herein. 2. The service conditions of the petitioner are, admittedly, governed by the provisions of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1 “RAF”, hereinafter Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 515/2024 Page 1 of 8 Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Date:16.10.2025 14:46:56 19492 and the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 19553. 3. The order of dismissal was in culmination of disciplinary proceedings which were initiated against the petitioner vide chargesheet dated 14 October 2022, issued under Section 11(1)4 of the CRPF Act read with Rule 155 of the CRPF Rules. 4. It appears to us to be somewhat strange that the penalty of dismissal from service has been treated as a minor punishment under Section 11 of the CRPF Act. However, as the provision is not under challenge, we refrain from saying any further on this aspect. 5. There were three charges against the petitioner. It is not necessary for us to reproduce all the charges. Suffice it to state that (i) the first charge was that the petitioner had married one