IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Jaishree Thakur, J.
Jagdeep Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab & Anr. - Respondents
CWP-5981-2017 (O&M)
Decided On : 02-11-2022
FIR - Recruitment to the post of Constable - Punjab Police Act, 2007, Rules 12.12, 12.14, 12.18 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 - The court held that denial of appointment based on the pendency of FIR was unjustified as the petitioner was not named in the FIR, summoned, or charge-sheeted. The impugned order was set aside, and the respondents were directed to issue an appointment letter to the petitioner for the post of Male Constable.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner applied for the post of Male Constable and was found fit for recruitment. However, his appointment was denied based on a pending criminal case against him. The petitioner challenged the order, arguing that he was not named in the FIR, summoned, or charge-sheeted, and had disclosed all facts during the selection process.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was not named in the FIR, summoned, or charge-sheeted, and had disclosed all relevant information during the selection process. The denial of appointment was held to be unjustified.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner could be denied appointment based on the pendency of a criminal case against him, despite not being named in the FIR, summoned, or charge-sheeted.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that denial of appointment based on the pendency of FIR was unjustified as the petitioner was not named in the FIR, summoned, or charge-sheeted.
Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, and the respondents were directed to issue an appointment letter to the petitioner for the post of Male Constable.
JUDGMENT
Jaishree Thakur, J. - This is a petition that has been filed seeking issuance of a writ, order and direction for quashing order dated 19.01.2017 (Annexure P-5), wherein the petitioner herein has been declared as unfit for recruitment to the post of Constable and further to issue him the appointment letter to the post of Constable to which he has been selected.
2. In brief, the facts as culled out are that the Punjab Police invited online applications for 7416 posts (4915 for District Police Cadre and 2501 for Armed Police Cadre) for recruitment of Male and Female Constables in the District Police Cadre and Armed Police Cadre vide advertisement No.1/2016, dated 31.05.2016. The petitioner possessing all the requisite qualifications for the post of Male Constable as per the advertisement, applied for both District Police Cadre and Armed Police Cadre and was issued Roll Number for the Physical Measurement Test and Physical Screening Test, which was to be conducted on 16.09.2016 at Police Lines Stadium, Sangrur. The petitioner cleared the qualifying race, long jump and high jump for Physical Screening Test and Physical Measurement Test and his name figured in the provisional merit list at serial No.192. Thereafter, the petitioner was sent for medical examination at Civil Hospital, Mansa and his medical examination was conducted on 05.11.2016 and he was found to be fit and the certificate of fitness was subsequently sent to the respondents by the Hospital. His police verification was sent on 06.11.2016 and petitioner was called for issuance of the appointment letter at 36th Battalion PAP, Bahadurgarh, Patiala on 21.11.2016, but the appointment letter was not issued to him on the ground that police verification report has not been received. The petitioner approached the Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur and also the Director General of Police, Punjab with the written representations requesting them to issue him the appointment letter. On 19.01.2017, without any show cause notice to the petitioner, the respondents passed an order rejecting the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Constable, on the ground that there is a pending criminal case against the petitioner bearing FIR No.0142, dated 06.10.2016, registered under Sections 307, 323, 506, 341, 148 and 149 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the SC/ST Act, at Police Station Lehra. Aggrieved against the impugned order, the petitioner submitted a legal notice to the Director General of Police, Punjab to withdraw the same, but to no avail. Thus, the instant writ petition.
3. Mr. R. S. Bains, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Amar Jeet, Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner would contend that the aforesaid FIR was falsely registered against the father of the petitioner and others, in which all of them were later discharged. He would submit that no charge-sheet was filed against anybody in that case and it was only through the impugned order, that the petitioner came to know about his involvement in the said FIR. It is further submitted that neither the name of the petitioner is in the said FIR nor the petitioner was ever summoned, arrested, called for investigation or declared as a proclaimed offender.
4. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner would also submit that the petitioner was not even present in the village when the incident took place and did not suppress any of the information during the whole selection process. The whole selection process except the medical examination was completed before the registration of FIR and the petitioner at all stages of the selection process had disclosed all the facts and no information was concealed at any stage of the selection process. He would further submit that it is a settled principle of law that mere registration of an FIR or criminal case cannot be a ground for cancellation of the candidature and the FIR or criminal case can only be the ground for cancellation of the candidature only when the can
Denial of appointment based on the pendency of FIR requires the candidate to be named in the FIR, summoned, or charge-sheeted.
A candidate's non-involvement in a criminal case, confirmed by removal from the FIR, allows for consideration in the current recruitment process despite prior allegations.
The judgment establishes the principle that truthful disclosure of criminal cases and pending proceedings is paramount for enlistment in government jobs, particularly for police officers.
Point of Law : Suppression of information about pending criminal case in verification form is a sufficient ground for canceling the candidature or withholding appointment.
Employment eligibility should be evaluated based on rules in place during application, not amended rules enacted post-selection process.
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.