Punjab & Haryana HC Grants Relief To Candidate Declared 'Unfit' For Constable Post Based On Criminal Case Against Father
Punjab and Haryana High Court recently came to the aid of a candidate who was denied appointment to the post of Police Constable citing criminal antecedents, on the ground that he was neither named in the alleged FIR, nor summoned or charge-sheeted.The bench comprising Justice Jaishree Thakur was informed that the alleged FIR was falsely registered against the father of the petitioner and...
Punjab and Haryana High Court recently came to the aid of a candidate who was denied appointment to the post of Police Constable citing criminal antecedents, on the ground that he was neither named in the alleged FIR, nor summoned or charge-sheeted.
The bench comprising Justice Jaishree Thakur was informed that the alleged FIR was falsely registered against the father of the petitioner and others, in which all of them were later discharged. The police has also filed a cancellation report and the same has been accepted by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, the bench noted. It thus said,
"The sole reason for denying appointment to the petitioner herein is on account of the fact that he was found involved in the aforesaid FIR. The respondents-State has not been able to establish that the petitioner was nominated as an accused or was arrested under the aforesaid FIR."
The Court was of the view that the employer is well within his right to reject the candidature of a candidate if the Appointing Authority gets to know that criminal proceedings against a candidate is in progress.
It is trite to hold that the police force is a disciplined force and the employer is well within his right to reject the candidature of a candidate, where the Appointing Authority upon verification of character and antecedents of the candidate recommended for appointment comes to know that criminal proceedings against a candidate is in progress and the status of the case is reported to be either under investigation or challaned and charges framed.
It further added that if the candidate gets convicted, then too appointment shall be denied to him. The court further noted that in a case where the candidate is convicted for an offence involving moral turpitude or an offence punishable with imprisonment for three years or more, he/she shall not be considered for appointment.
The issue before the Court was whether the petitioner can be denied appointment to the post of Male Constable (General Duty) on the ground that he did not disclose the pendency of the criminal case at the time in his application form or the attestation form.
Coming on to the facts of the instant case, the court said,
"On the asking of the Court whether any proceeding had been initiated against the petitioner under Section 82 Cr.P.C. or not, learned State counsel on instructions from Assistant Sub-Inspector Devi Dayal has answered in the negative. It would be worthwhile to note that over 61 persons had been named in the aforesaid FIR and the [proclamation] order could perhaps pertain to any of those not arrested. The trial Court had discharged few of the accused, who had been arrested and one of them is the father of the petitioner herein. The police has also filed a cancellation report and the same has been accepted by the Court of Judicial Magistrate."
For the reasons recorded above, the court allowed the present writ petition and directed the Respondents to issue an appointment letter to the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks.
The petitioner is also held entitled to all the consequential benefits in the nature of seniority, pay, leave etc. with effect from the date, when person lower in the merit to him had been so appointed to the post of Constable in the same very process of selection. The Court however clarified that the petitioner shall not be paid the actual arrears of salary for the period in question.
Case Title: JAGDEEP SINGH VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 286
Click Here To Read/Download Order