Archive · 25 Aug 2026
Madhya Pradesh court orders promotion for brave anti-dacoit cop
A police constable helped other officers arrest a wanted criminal in 2010.
His senior police officer recommended that he receive a special promotion.
Instead, the authorities gave him Rs 1,600 and did not approve the promotion.
The constable said this was unfair because another officer received the promotion.
The state argued that his work had been considered and that he was not eligible.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court examined the records about the operation.
It said the senior officer’s recommendation was important and could not be ignored without a fair reason.
The court ordered the constable’s promotion and related benefits.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ordered an out-of-turn promotion for a constable who participated in the arrest of wanted criminal Gulfam.
The court said awarding the constable only Rs 1,600 was inadequate and could lower the morale of police personnel facing serious risks.
The Ratlam superintendent of police had specifically recommended the constable for promotion after the 2010 operation in Uttar Pradesh.
The constable relied on police diary entries, a reward list, newspaper reports and a hotel bill to establish his participation.
The court said the recommendation could not be rejected arbitrarily and granted promotion with consequential benefits from the date similarly placed personnel were promoted.
- Who
- A Madhya Pradesh police constable, the Ratlam superintendent of police, state authorities and the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
- What
- The High Court ordered an out-of-turn promotion for the constable after finding that his recommendation had been rejected unfairly.
- When
- The arrest operation took place in 2010, and the High Court order was issued on August 21.
- Where
- The wanted criminal was arrested in Rampur, Uttar Pradesh, after a case was registered at Manak Chowk Police Station in Ratlam.
- Why
- The court found that the constable had actively and bravely participated in the operation and that the SP’s specific recommendation could not be treated as routine.
Constable’s position
State’s position
Eligibility for promotion
Constable’s position
The constable argued that his active participation in the anti-dacoit operation and the Ratlam SP’s specific recommendation entitled him to out-of-turn consideration.
State’s position
The state argued that his role had been considered but that authorities did not find him eligible or suitable for the promotion.
Recognition of service
Constable’s position
The constable maintained that a Rs 1,600 reward was insufficient and that another officer received the promotion despite allegedly not appearing in the relevant records or recommendation.
State’s position
The state pointed to the Rs 1,600 reward as recognition of the constable’s contribution.
Authority’s discretion
Constable’s position
The constable challenged the denial as unfair and discriminatory, particularly because similarly placed personnel received out-of-turn promotions.
State’s position
The state relied on the discretionary nature of out-of-turn promotion under Regulation 70-A.
- Court
- Madhya Pradesh High Court
- Judge
- Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke
- Promotion rule
- Regulation 70-A
- Operation
- Arrest of wanted criminal Gulfam in 2010
- Criminal’s reward
- Rs 25,000
- Constable’s reward
- Rs 1,600
- Court’s direction
- Grant out-of-turn promotion with consequential benefits from the date similarly situated personnel were promoted