The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of arrest, custody, and anticipatory bail in the context of the petitioner's response to a police verification form.

JUDGMENT

Protik Prakash Banerjee, J. - This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India which challenges an order dated May 17, 2013 passed by the Executive Officer, Burdwan. By the said order, the Executive Officer, terminated the service of the writ petitioner, after he appointed pursuant to due process, admittedly without any disciplinary proceeding. This termination was made by way of cancellation of the appointment of the writ petitioner purportedly because he had suppressed a material fact about his having been arrested in a criminal case and also because he had undertaken that his appointment was liable to cancelled if any adverse comment is made regarding his antecedents by the police.

2. The false statement imputed to be a suppression of fact is regarding the involvement of the petitioner in connection with Memari PS Case No. 18/6 dated 30-01-2006 under section 420/417/492/376-IPC and that the categorical assertion the petitioner was never arrested by any Police Officer is not correct because it is found from the Judgment dated 30-11-2011 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court, Burdwan that Sri Samir Halder, Sahayak was arrested and produced before the Hon'ble Court and subsequently granted bail after suffering a considerable period of custody.

3. The matter was adjourned from time to time for the learned Advocate for the respondents to come back with instructions. When the instructions arrived and the Affidavit-in-Opposition was filed after condonation of delay, it appeared that the entire casus belli of the respondents pertains to the question mentioned in column 14 of the verification form submitted by him as opposed to the recording made in the judgment and order dated November 30, 2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in S.C. 144/08 S.T. 1(12)09. It is in the judgment of the jurisdictional magistrate that the accused persons were arrested and produced before this Court and subsequently they were granted bail after suffering a considerable period of custody.

4. Mr. Mukherjee, learned senior advocate appearing for the State assisted by Mr. Santanu Mitra have appeared today and produced the original verification form submitted by the petitioner to the respondents. Column 14 of the said form asked the petitioner the following question:

"Have you ever been arrested, detained or convicted by a Court for any offence? If the answer is 'yes' the full particulars of the arrest or detention or conviction and the sentence should be given."

5. The petitioner answered this with a resounding 'no'. Despite the aforesaid on the basis of a recording made in the judgment that some unspecified accused was arrested in a case where the petitioner was one of the accused persons, the respondents have taken the view that the petitioner had been less than truthful in his answer to the verification form. The petitioner, on the other hand, has contended that the order of the jurisdictional criminal court granting him anticipatory bail shows he was never arrested, and he has also relied upon certain documents which would show that the investigating officer has admitted that he never arrested the petitioner and the petitioner was never taken into custody. Admittedly the petitioner has not been convicted of any offence. The records show that though the petitioner obtained anticipatory bail on February 18, 2006, he was released on interim bail by the order dated February 20, 2006. It is of course true that he was acquitted, but that is not the point. Even if the petitioner had not been physically arrested, whether grant of an anticipatory bail amounts to the accused not being arrested is the real point to be decided.

6. A common misconception is that unless a person is taken into custody by the police he is not arrested. However, what happens when a person gets an anticipatory bail and surrenders to the Court of the Jurisdictional Magistrate? Does it have the same effect as an a