R. SUBRAMANIAN, SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Superintendent of Police, Villupuram – Appellant
Versus
S. Rajeshkumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: This Review Application has been filed under Order 47, Rules 1 and 2 r/w. Section 114 of Civil Procedure Code, seeking to review the order of this Court dated 11.01.2019 passed in W.A. No. 2759 of 2018.)
Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup, J.
1. This is a Review Petition filed by the State to revise the order passed in W.A.No.2759 of 2018, dated 11.01.2019 by this Court.
2. It is a case of the Review Applicant/State that the Respondent herein who is the Writ Petitioner/Rajeshkumar from Villupuram District was selected as Police Constable. He had suppressed the fact that there was criminal case against him. In the application form, for the Post of Police Constable, there were columns regarding pending criminal cases or cases in which the candidates were involved. In those columns, the Respondent/Writ Appellant/Candidate had stated “no case pending”.
3. Before admitting the candidate, after the selection, on verification by the Police, it was found that the Respondent/Writ Appellant was involved in a criminal case for the offences under Sections 294 (b), 355, 353 and 506(i) of IPC in Cr.No.471 of 2013 on the file of the Ulundurpet Police Station, Villupuram District. Therefore,
The Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, prohibits stigma against juveniles in conflict with the law, emphasizing the protection and rehabilitation of juveniles, and the prohibition of stigma even in cases of....
There cannot be any disqualification on a juvenile in conflict with law.
Juvenile acquittal in serious offences bars disqualification from police employment; records obliterated under fresh start principle, overriding screening assessments of integrity.
Juveniles in conflict with law cannot face disqualification in future employment opportunities due to prior convictions as per Section 24 of the JJ Act, 2015.
The main legal point established is that a juvenile's conviction should not be a disqualification for future employment, as per Section 24 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while the suppression of material facts regarding criminal cases rendered the petitioners unfit for appointment, the provisions of the Juvenil....
Juvenile candidate acquitted on merits in serious offence cannot be denied police appointment mechanically by Screening Committee for 'non-honourable' acquittal; discretion must reasonably consider a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the protection of juveniles under the Juvenile Justice Act, emphasizing that a juvenile in conflict with law should not suffer any disqualification....
Involvement in criminal cases does not automatically disqualify a candidate from being considered for appointment to the post of Grade-II Police Constable. The authorities must assess the nature of t....
The court established that suppression of criminal history does not automatically disqualify candidates; each case must be assessed on its individual merits and circumstances.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.