Ex Ct Gd Ankaj Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Ex Ct Gd Ankaj Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether non-examination of the priest who allegedly solemnised the second marriage and of the second wife during the Departmental Inquiry vitiated the disciplinary action. +3 more

Court's answer

The record confirmed through a report from the Office of the Superintendent of Police that the Petitioner married Ms. Priyanka Bharti during the subsistence of his marriage with his first wife, Mrs. Renu Devi; witness statements corroborated the second marriage, and in his communication dated 28.08.2023 the Petitioner himself stated that Ms. Priyanka Bharti had separated from him and would return to her parental home.

Ratio / Principle

Once the factum of the second marriage during the subsistence of the first marriage stands established, examination of the priest or the second wife was not indispensable, particularly when sufficient documentary and oral material, including the Petitioner's own statement vide communication dated 28.08.2023, was available on record to substantiate the charge.

Key takeaways

Subsequent withdrawal of the complaint by the Petitioner's first wife would not come to the rescue of the Petitioner, as the withdrawal application does not deny that the Petitioner had contracted a second marriage with Ms. Priyanka Bharti.ratio¶20
The judgment in Shailender Kumar (supra) relied upon by the Petitioner is distinguishable on facts: in that case the second marriage had been contracted after dissolution of the first marriage through a village panchayat arrangement, and the factual matrix of the present case is materially different.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi dismisses the writ petition of a former Constable (GD) challenging his dismissal from service (order dated 31.08.2023) for contracting a second marriage during the subsistence of his first marriage, his Appeal and Revision having already been dismissed by the competent authorities. Holding that once the factum of the second marriage stands established — by the Superintendent of Police report, corroborating witness statements, and the Petitioner's own communication dated 28.08.2023 acknowledging separation — examination of the solemnising priest or the second wife was not indispensable, the Court further held that the subsequent settlement with, and withdrawal of complaint by, the first wife afforded no relief since the withdrawal application did not deny the second marriage. Shailender Kumar (W.P.(C) 515/2024) was distinguished on facts, as there the second marriage had been contracted after dissolution of the first marriage through a village panchayat arrangement. Reiterating that judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited and the Writ Court does not sit in appeal over findings of fact recorded in departmental proceedings, no ground for interference was made out and the Writ Petition was dismissed.

$~5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- W.P.(C) 3033/2026

EX CT GD ANKAJ KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. K. K. Sharma, Mr. Pratham Kindra and Mr. Tushar Batra, Advs.

versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhishek Mahajan, SPC along with Mr. Vinay Kaushik, Adv. Insp Athurv, Mr. Ramniwas Yadav and Mr. Inderpal – CRPF.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 13.05.2026

Through the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 31.08.2023 whereby he was dismissed from service on the ground that he had contracted a second marriage during the subsistence of his first marriage. It is noted that from the first wedlock, the Petitioner has four children. The Appeal as well as the Revision preferred by the Petitioner have also been dismissed by the competent authorities.

Learned counsel representing the Petitioner has made the following submissions:

i. That the priest who allegedly solemnised the alleged second marriage as well as the second wife were not examined during the Departmental Inquiry

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 15/05/2026 at 13:03:05

ii. That subsequent to the departmental proceedings, a settlement has been arrived at between the Petitioner and his first wife pursuant to which she has withdrawn her complaint

iii. Reliance is placed upon the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench in Shailender Kumar v. Union of India and Ors & Ors. , W.P.(C) 515/2024.

This Court has considered the submissions advanced. The record reflects that during the departmental proceedings, a report was obtained from the Office of the Superintendent of Police, wherein it stood confirmed that the Petitioner had married Ms. Priyanka Bharti during the subsistence of his marriage with his first wife, Mrs. Renu Devi. Further, the statements of other witnesses recorded during the inquiry also corroborate the factum of the second marriage. Furthermore, in his communication dated 28.08.2023, the Petitioner himself stated that Ms. Priyanka Bharti had separated from him and would return to her parental home.

Once the factum of the second marriage during the subsistence of the first marriage stands established, examination of the priest or the second wife was not indispensable, particularly when sufficient documentary and oral material, including the Petitioner’s own statement vide communication dated 28.08.2023, was available on record to substantiate the charge.

Similarly, subsequent withdrawal of the complaint by Petitioner’s first wife would not come to the rescue of the Petitioner, as the withdrawal application does not deny that the Petitioner had contracted a second marriage with Ms. Priyanka Bharti.

Further, he judgment relied upon in Shailender Kumar (supra) is distinguishable on facts, as in the said case the second marriage had

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 15/05/2026 at 13:03:05

been contracted after dissolution of the first marriage through a village panchayat arrangement. The factual matrix of the present case is materially different.

It is also well settled that the scope of judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited and the Writ Court does not sit in appeal over findings of fact recorded in departmental proceedings. 8. In view of the above, no ground for interference is made out. The present Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

AMIT MAHAJAN, J.

MAY 13, 2026 s.godara/shah

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 15/05/2026 at 13:03:05