Cancellation of Appointment on Concealment of Criminal Case is Valid

Cancellation of Appointment on Concealment of Criminal Case has been upheld by Allahabad High Court.

In the instant case, the candidature of the petitioner to the post of Constable in UP police was invalidated. 

Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Allahabad High Court. 

Petitioner files a false affidavit.

In an affidavit dated 11.06.2018, the petitioner had stated that no criminal cases were pending against him and that he was not involved in any criminal activities.

But there was a clause in the declaration where it was mentioned that if the candidate was found guilty of suppressing any material facts, his candidature will be cancelled.

However it came to light that three criminal cases were pending against him so by order dated 28.01.2019, his candidature was cancelled.

There was no need to mention these cases

Counsel for the petitioner stated that the declaration of the pending trial was irrelevant because in
first case he was acquitted,
second the investigation has concluded.
In third case, a compromise has been reached.

Counsel for the respondents submits that suppression of facts was willful.

Counsel who appeared on behalf of respondent state submitted that suppression of facts of criminal cases was wilful.

It was argued that the petitioner was accused of grave offences, and in all the cases, he was never acquitted honourably.

So the cancellation of appointment is legal.

Compromise between parties does not amount to Honourable Acquittal.

After going through pending cases that were registered against the petitioner, Hon’ble Justice Ajay Bhanot of the Allahabad High Court noted:-

“criminal proceedings were quashed on the most grave charges on the foot of a mutual agreement between two private parties. 

Such compromise between private parties and consequent quashing of criminal proceedings by this Court
does not amount to an honourable acquittal by a court of law.”

Regarding other cases filed against the petitioner, the Court noted that
antecedents of the petitioner show a clear pattern that he was involved in other criminal activities
and might not be suitable for the police force.

The Court also relied on the Avtar Singh case where it was held that deliberate suppression of facts about pending criminal cases
by a prospective employee gives the right to an employer to cancel candidature or terminate the person from service.

Hon’ble Court held that in light of all the evidence, the candidature of the petitioner was found to be unsuitable for police force.

Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.

Case Details:-

Title: Kailash Chaudhary vs the State of UP and another 

Case No.: WRIT – A No. – 5720 of 2019

Date of Order: 05.10.2020

Coram: Hon’ble Justice Ajay Bhanot

Counsel for Petitioner:- Ishan Deo Giri 

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. 

Download Law Trend App

Law Trend
Legal News Website Providing Latest Judgments of Supreme Court and High Court

Related Articles

Latest Articles