Back
SIDDHARTH
Manoj Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri S.B. Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ram Chandra Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. This writ petition has been filed praying for quashing of the order dated 04.09.2019 passed by the respondent no. 3, Superintendent of Police, Rae Bareilly. Further direction has been sought against the aforesaid respondent no. 3 to permit the petitioner for training and after completion of training issue appointment letter to him.
3. The brief facts of the petition are that the petitioner applied for the post of Civil Police Constable, PAC (Male) and was declared successful in the selection. His name found place in the merit list in O.B.C category. He filed an affidavit disclosing the offences wherein he was involved dated 30.05.2018. On 08.06.2018 the petitioner was directed to appear before the Medical Board, Azamgarh by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Azamgarh and he appeared before the Medical Board and was selected.
4. After medical test he was sent for training to District – Rae Bareilly where he was restrained from training on the ground that he was involved in criminal cases. The respondent no. 4, U.P. Polic
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a person's involvement in criminal cases as a minor does not automatically disqualify them for appointment in the police service, and relevant....
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....
Juvenile acquittal in serious offences bars disqualification from police employment; records obliterated under fresh start principle, overriding screening assessments of integrity.
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....
Denial of appointment – Qualification - A juvenile, who, has committed an offence and has been dealt with under provisions of said Act of 2000, shall not suffer disqualification, if any, attaching to....
Non-disclosure of juvenile criminal cases by candidates does not constitute concealment, and such grounds cannot invalidate employment.
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 is that a juvenile's conviction should not be a disqualification for future employment, as per Section 24 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
Acquittal, regardless of being with benefit of doubt, does not disqualify candidates from employment; youthful indiscretions should not hinder future opportunities.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
