$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010161072025 + W.P.(C) 3783/2025 RAJESH SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shashank Tripathi, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr Syed Abdul Haseeb, CGSC with Mr Muhammad Aamir Khan, Adv. Mr. Vinod Sawant (Law Officer), Inspector Athurv, CRPF CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA O R D E R % 12.08.2026 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner has questioned the legality and substantiality of the punishment of order dated 18th June, 2024 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and order dated 05th November, 2024 passed by the Appellate Authority. 3. Vide impugned order dated 18th June 2024, after the disciplinary proceedings, punishment of withholding the annual increment for a period of one year with a stern warning was imposed on the petitioner 4. The charge against the petitioner are :- a) that of the under the influence of alcohol while on duty. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/08/2026 at 13:21:38 b) under the influence of alcohol entered into a fight with driver Anil Kumar of the battalion. 5. In support of the aforesaid charge against the petitioner, independent witnesses from the battalion were examined including the documentary evidence which includes the medical record. 6. It is brought to our notice that none of the witnesses who deposed from the battalion, witnessed the physical fight between the two i.e., petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar. 7. Apart from above, the only evidence that is brought on record is in relation to the hearsay evidence by the witnesses about the alleged fight. 8. If we examine the medical record qua the physical fight, as alleged in the charge-sheet, no injuries were sustained by the petitioner, as is inferred from the doctor’s certificate. Furthermore, the doctor is not examined in support of the medical certificate which was accepted by the Inquiry Officer so also the Appellate Authority. 9. Even if the medical certificate speaks of smell of alcohol, that by itself cannot be a ground to infer that the petitioner consumed alcohol and was under the influence of alcohol, when he is alleged to have entered into a physical altercation with a fellow employee. 10. Unless the medical certificate is proved by examination of the concerned Doctor, to infer that the petitioner was under the influence of alcohol while discharging his duty, it will be difficult to accept the said charge against the petitioner. 11. As stated hereinbefore, there is no direct material to infer that the petitioner had a physical fight with a fellow employee. 12. That being so, the findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer so also This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/08/2026 at 13:21:38 affirmed by the Appellate Authority to the impugned order cannot be said to be sustained as the same goes contrary to the principles of natural justice. 13. The writ petition as such stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b). 14. Let the benefit be passed on to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of this order. 15. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE, J AMIT SHARMA, J AUGUST 12, 2026/sky/ok This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/08/2026 at 13:21:38