SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has quashed the adverse Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) of a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) officer, holding that his superiors acted with “extreme bias” and “vindictiveness” after he protested against alleged corruption in his unit, reports appearing in the media said.
Justice Mohammad Akram Chowdhary, in a detailed 20-page judgment in WP(C) No. 1607/2023, directed that the adverse remarks in the 2018–19 APAR of Vikas Choudhary, Second-in-Command, Range Headquarters, CRPF Hiranagar, Jammu and Kashmir, be expunged. The court also ordered the authorities to convene a review Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) to consider his promotion if his juniors have already been elevated.
The court found that the officer’s superiors had “deliberately created memos and advisories” to justify the adverse grading, which deprived Choudhary of his promotion. “This Court is compelled to observe that the Reporting Officer as Commandant 62nd Battalion, had acted with extreme bias and had even proceeded to prepare documents with the same objective — to ruin the career of the petitioner,” Justice Chowdhary observed.
The court noted that instead of acting as mentors and leaders, Choudhary’s superiors “conducted themselves with vindictiveness and malice.”
Choudhary, a decorated CRPF officer awarded the Police Medal for Gallantry, had challenged the “Good” grading and adverse remarks recorded in his 2018–19 APAR, contending that his then superior officers — Commandant Manish Kumar Meena and Deputy Inspector General S.K. Mishra — had acted with bias after he refused to join their alleged “corrupt and improper practices” while serving with the 62 Battalion CRPF at Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh.
The petition claimed that in retaliation for his refusal, his APARs were downgraded to a level below the benchmark required for promotion. His representations challenging these remarks were later rejected by the CRPF’s Central Zone headquarters in Kolkata in February 2021 and September 2022.
Justice Chowdhary noted that Choudhary’s subsequent APARs, once the same officers were transferred, were graded “Outstanding” and “Very Good,” which “amply established” that the earlier downgrading was rooted in personal hostility.
The court also referred to a CRPF office order dated March 28, 2025, which confirmed that a Court of Inquiry had been ordered against Commandant Meena for “malpractices” between 2017 and 2020. The judge said this development validated Choudhary’s earlier complaints of corruption. “The issuance of this order clearly indicates that the concerns raised by the petitioner were found to be correct by the authorities later on,” the judgment said.
The court, however, refrained from recommending further disciplinary action against Meena, noting that a Court of Inquiry was already in progress.
Justice Chowdhary pointed out several procedural violations in the recording of the APAR. The Inspector General who accepted Choudhary’s 2018–19 report had supervised him for only 44 days — far short of the 90 days required under CRPF Standing Order No. 04 of 2015. “This is not a mere irregularity but goes to the very root of jurisdiction,” the court held.
It also noted that the reviewing and accepting authorities had endorsed the APAR with perfunctory remarks such as “I agree” without providing any reasoning, in violation of Clause 3.19 of the Standing Order. Additionally, Choudhary’s representation filed in November 2019 was rejected after more than 13 months, exceeding the prescribed 30-day limit, and without addressing his grounds of appeal.
The court found that Choudhary’s professional record contradicted the adverse evaluation. “During the same year 2018–19, the petitioner was formally commended at the highest levels of CRPF; he received appreciation certificates from the DIG, the IG, and was awarded the DG’s Commendation Disc for ensuring peaceful conduct of elections,” the judge wrote.
Concluding that the adverse remarks were “actuated with malice,” the High Court ordered them to be quashed. Justice Chowdhary directed the CRPF to expunge the remarks and conduct a review DPC to assess Choudhary’s eligibility for promotion from the date his junior was promoted, with all consequential benefits.
