'Whether Playing Cards Under Gambling Act Amounts To An Offence Involving Moral Turpitude'? Supreme Court To Consider

The Division Bench of Justices SK Kaul and MM Sundresh issued notice on the petition filed by one Satendra Singh Tomar, against a 2019 judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

Through the impugned judgment, a Division Bench of the High Court at Gwalior had set aside a single Judge order, directing the Screening Committee to reconsider its decision cancelling the Petitioner's candidature for the post of Constable in Police.

The Petitioner was said to have committed an act of moral turpitude, due to his conviction under Section 13 of the 1867 Act for playing cards in a colony. The Screening Committee had stated that he was not fit for an employment in disciplined force.

Stating that it is within the discretion of the employer to not to recruit such incumbent, an appeal was filed before the Division Bench against the Single Judge's order, which came to be allowed on January 23, 2019. The said order is impugned before the Top Court.

The Division Bench had opined that in view of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Abhijit Singh Pawar, the single judge's decision cannot be upheld.

In the case of Abhijit Singh Pawar, the Supreme Court had observed that even after disclosure is made by a candidate about criminal cases pending against him, the employer would be well within his rights to consider the antecedents and the suitability of the candidate.

In his special leave petition, Tomar has argued that among the list of offences in the Schedule to the 1867 Act, the offence under Section 13 has not been mentioned. But that has been opined as only illustrative list of offences and not exhaustive, his counsel added.

Advocates Siddharth Sharma, Prashant Sharma, Shashank Singh and AOR Madhuram Aparajita represented the Petitioner.

Case Title: Satendra Singh Tomar v. State of MP & Ors.