-
by sayum
07 July 2026 3:12 PM
The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the dismissal of a Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) constable, Sumit Kumar, affirming the application of CISF Rules, 2001 in disciplinary proceedings. The Court found no procedural lapses in the departmental inquiry that led to the petitioner’s removal from service.
Sumit Kumar, formerly a CISF constable, faced charges of gross misconduct, indiscipline, and negligence towards orders. The charges stemmed from his failure to comply with a commandant’s directive, attempts to pressurize the unit administration, and a history of disciplinary issues, including five prior minor penalties. After Kumar’s failure to respond to a chargesheet, a departmental inquiry ensued, culminating in his removal from service.
Kumar’s legal team challenged this decision, alleging procedural irregularities in the departmental inquiry, including the denial of Hindi translations of documents and refusal to accept his nominated defense assistants. Further, they argued the punishment was harsh and disproportionate.
The High Court, after meticulous examination, concluded that the departmental inquiry was conducted in strict adherence to CISF Rules. The Court observed that Kumar’s conduct was unbecoming of a CISF personnel and his history of disciplinary issues painted the picture of a habitual offender.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee, in his judgment, emphasized, “A blot is a blot, be it of the slightest degree and the magnitude thereof is of little relevance.” The Court found no merit in Kumar’s claims of procedural lapses, noting his consistent evasion and lack of remorse throughout the inquiry process.
The Court dismissed the petition, upholding the decision to remove Sumit Kumar from service. The judgment underscored the necessity of maintaining discipline and conduct in armed forces, deeming the punishment appropriate and commensurate with the charges.
Date of Decision: February 14, 2024.
Sumit Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.
