Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds CISF Constable’s Removal Over Harassment Allegation in Visakhapatnam

Amaravati, September 16, 2026: The Andhra Pradesh High Court has upheld the dismissal of a Central Industrial Security Force constable who was removed from service after being accused of harassing a girl at a vegetable market in Visakhapatnam after duty hours. The court ruled that a member of a disciplined force is expected to maintain restraint, dignity and propriety not only while on duty but also in public life.

Justice V. Sujatha, in an order dated September 11, said the standards expected of a government servant, especially someone serving in a disciplined organisation, extend beyond the workplace. The court observed 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 case arose from an incident on November 14, 2013, when the constable, attached to the CISF Visakhapatnam unit, had completed his general shift and gone to a local vegetable market. According to the allegations, he made hand and head gestures towards a girl standing near a shop and invited her to eat pani puri. The girl’s friends later confronted him and assaulted him. He then sought help from nearby Home Guard personnel, who alerted the CISF control room after learning his identity.

Following the incident, the CISF issued a charge memorandum on November 20, 2013. He was accused of leaving his post without permission and harassing an unknown girl. A departmental inquiry was then initiated. During the proceedings, witnesses were examined, the constable was allowed to cross-examine them, and he was also given an opportunity to present his defence. The Enquiry Officer concluded that the charge had been proved.

After reviewing the inquiry report and the constable’s explanation, the Senior Commandant ordered his removal from service on January 22, 2014. The punishment was later challenged through departmental appeals and a revision petition before the Inspector General, but all of them were rejected.

The constable, who hails from Punjab, also pursued civil proceedings, but those too failed on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. He subsequently moved the Andhra Pradesh High Court, seeking relief against the disciplinary action.

Before the court, counsel for the petitioner argued that the girl at the centre of the allegations was never examined in the inquiry and that there was no independent complaint lodged by her. The defence also contended that a statement recorded during the preliminary inquiry had been taken under coercion after he was assaulted. The CISF, however, maintained that the inquiry had been conducted in accordance with procedure, that the constable had been given sufficient opportunity to defend himself, and that he had in fact admitted the charge during the preliminary inquiry.

The High Court found no material on record to support the claim that the statement had been extracted by force. It also noted that the petitioner had participated fully in the departmental proceedings and could not later argue that he had been denied a fair chance to defend himself. On that basis, the court held that he had failed to meet the standard of conduct expected of a member of the Force in a public place.

Declining to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution, the court dismissed the petition and allowed the removal from service to stand. The ruling reiterates that personnel in uniformed and paramilitary forces remain answerable for their conduct even after duty hours, particularly when their behaviour in public reflects on the organisation they serve.