Amaravati, September 16, 2026: The Andhra Pradesh High Court has upheld the removal from service of a Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) constable accused of harassing a girl at a vegetable market in Visakhapatnam after completing his duty hours. The court emphasised that personnel belonging to a disciplined force are required to maintain a high standard of conduct not only in official duties but also in public life.
Justice V. Sujatha, in an order dated September 11, observed that a government servant, particularly a member of a disciplined force, must conduct himself with restraint, dignity and propriety in society. The court stated that the petitioner “is expected to maintain a high standard of discipline, decorum and propriety not only while discharging his official duties but also in his conduct in the outside society.”
The incident occurred on November 14, 2013. After finishing his general shift, the constable, posted with the CISF Visakhapatnam unit, went to a local vegetable market. It was alleged that he made hand and head gestures towards a girl standing near a shop and invited her to have pani puri. Friends of the girl subsequently confronted and assaulted him. He then approached nearby Home Guard personnel, who informed the CISF control room upon learning of his identity.
A charge memorandum was issued on November 20, 2013, accusing him of leaving his post without permission and harassing an unknown girl. A departmental enquiry followed. Witnesses were examined, the constable was permitted to cross-examine them and present his defence, and the Enquiry Officer held the charge proved. After considering the enquiry report and the constable’s explanation, the Senior Commandant imposed the penalty of removal from service on January 22, 2014.
Subsequent departmental appeals and a revision petition before the Inspector General were rejected. Civil proceedings initiated by the constable, who hails from Punjab, were also unsuccessful on grounds of territorial jurisdiction. He then approached the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
Counsel for the petitioner argued that the girl in question was never examined during the enquiry, that no independent complaint from her existed, and that a statement recorded in the preliminary enquiry had been obtained under coercion after the assault. The CISF authorities contended that the enquiry was conducted in accordance with procedure, that the constable had been given adequate opportunity to defend himself, and that he had himself accepted the charge during the preliminary enquiry.
The High Court found no material on record to establish that the statement had been extracted by force. It noted that the petitioner had fully participated in the departmental proceedings and could not subsequently claim that he had been denied a fair defence. The court held that the constable had failed to maintain the standard of conduct expected of a member of the Force in a public place and declined to interfere with the disciplinary decision under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition was dismissed.
The judgment underscores the principle that members of uniformed and paramilitary forces remain accountable for their behaviour even after duty hours, particularly when that behaviour occurs in public and affects the image of the organisation.
