In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has declared that candidates with criminal records are ineligible for appointment to the position of District Judge, citing concerns over integrity and the necessity for impeccable character in judicial roles. The decision came in response to Special Appeal No. 557 of 2024, filed by Ram Sewak against the Hon’ble High Court Judicature at Allahabad, Recruitment Cell, and two others.
Background of the Case
The appellant, Ram Sewak, applied for a Group “D” post at the District Court, Etah, following an advertisement issued by the High Court Recruitment Cell on October 27, 2022. Sewak was selected and appointed on June 1, 2023, after successfully completing the selection process. However, during the mandatory police verification, it was discovered that a criminal case (Case Crime No. 392/2022) was pending against him, which he had not disclosed in his affidavit.
Legal Issues Involved
The primary legal issue revolved around the concealment of pending criminal proceedings by the appellant. Ram Sewak had submitted an affidavit affirming that no criminal case was pending against him, a statement later proven false during police verification. The case raised critical questions about the integrity and suitability of candidates for judicial appointments, especially those involving the administration of justice.
Court’s Decision
The division bench, comprising Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Prashant Kumar, upheld the decision of the single judge who dismissed the writ petition at the admission stage. The court emphasized that the integrity and character of candidates for judicial positions must be beyond reproach.
Key Observations by the Court
1. Integrity and Character: The court underscored the importance of integrity and impeccable character for candidates seeking judicial appointments. It noted that the concealment of a pending criminal case by Ram Sewak was a serious breach of trust.
2. Impact of Concealment: The court observed that even if a candidate is acquitted of charges, the act of concealing pending criminal proceedings at the time of appointment is sufficient grounds for disqualification. The court stated, “The character and integrity of a candidate, who is seeking appointment in the District Judgeship, must be impeccable and his/her antecedents should be clean.”
3. Employer’s Discretion: The court highlighted that the employer retains the right to assess the suitability of a candidate, even in cases of acquittal. The judgment referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling in Avtar Singh v. Union of India, which allows employers to consider the antecedents of a candidate and make decisions based on the overall suitability for the position.
Also Read
Counsel and Parties Involved
– Appellant: Ram Sewak
– Respondents: Hon’ble High Court Judicature at Allahabad, Recruitment Cell, and two others
– Counsel for Appellant: Puneet Bhadauria
– Counsel for Respondents: Ashish Mishra and Fuzail Ahmad Ansari
