CRPF Issues Show-Cause Notices to Eight Officers Over Absence from Official Working Lunch

The Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) has issued show-cause notices to eight officers at the Assistant Commandant rank, including one female officer. This action followed their alleged refusal to participate in an official working lunch organized by a senior officer during a training session in Madhya Pradesh.

The officers were attending the Gazetted Officers’ Tech Course at a CRPF training facility when the incident occurred. The working lunch was held at the Gazetted Officers’ Mess, with a senior CRPF officer expected to engage with the trainees.

The CRPF perceived the absence of these officers from the event as a matter needing formal clarification, characterizing their behavior as insubordination according to sources within the force.

The initial show-cause notice, issued on June 30, 2026, instructed the officers to provide their explanations within three days of receipt.

More than a month later, the force headquarters noted that replies had not been submitted through the officers' respective units. This led to an urgent follow-up, demanding that the explanations be provided without further delay.

Media reports highlighting the internal communication noted that the officers were warned that failing to furnish explanations could be seen as having no defense to offer, allowing authorities to proceed ex-parte based on service rules.

The correspondence does not clarify why the eight Assistant Commandants did not attend the lunch, and no statements explaining their absence have been issued by the involved officers.

The CRPF has not publicly indicated if there were any justifiable reasons for the officers' absence, nor if they had requested prior exemptions from attending the event.

Officials familiar with the situation stated that any decision on further disciplinary steps would be contingent upon reviewing the officers' explanations. The show-cause notice itself isn't a conclusive finding of misconduct but an opportunity for the officers to explain their actions.

This incident has drawn attention due to ongoing debates about the administrative dynamics between Central Armed Police Forces cadre officers and Indian Police Service officers serving in deputation roles.

In recent years, some CAPF officers have expressed concerns over career advancement, command roles, and representation in senior leadership, with related structural issues reaching legal forums as well.

Amidst this backdrop, the disciplinary matter involving the eight Assistant Commandants has sparked discussions about whether such absences from official functions should prompt formal actions and how such events fit within the command structure of a uniformed service.

Reports citing CRPF officials suggest that the officers were expected to attend the official event and that their absence necessitated an explanation.

As of early August 2026, the situation remained at the show-cause stage, with no confirmed disciplinary actions taken against the officers.

The officers still have the chance to submit their explanations to the competent authority, after which the CRPF will decide if the case should be closed or if further proceedings are warranted under the relevant service and disciplinary regulations.