Acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically entitle a candidate to a government appointment, and the employer has the right to consider the antecedents and suitability of the candidate.

JUDGMENT

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

7(i). That, the respondents may kindly be directed to make appointment of the petitioner on the post of Constable in Department of Madhya Pradesh Police.

(ii) That, Any other writ order and direction, which is found just, suitable and proper in favour of the petitioner, may kindly be granted to the petitioner.

(ii-a) That, the order Annexure P/9 may kindly be set aside.''

2. The necessary facts for disposal of the present petition in short are that in the year 2017-18 an advertisement was issued by the respondents for appointment on the post of Police Constables. The said Special Recruitment Drive was for the members of primitive scheduled tribes. The petitioner also participated in the Special Recruitment Drive and by the merit list (Annexure P3), the petitioner was declared selected and accordingly, the Assistant Inspector General of Police, Special Branch, PHQ Bhopal, by letter dated 02/11/2018 (Annexure P5), directed the petitioner for his appearance before the Special Branch, PHQ Bhopal on 16/11/2018 for verification of his character. It is submitted that on 12/03/2017, Crime No.75/2017 was registered by Police Station Raghogarh, District Guna against the petitioner for offence u/S. 363 of IPC. Later on, charge-sheet for offence under Sections 363, 366, 376(1) of IPC and Section 3 /4 of Protection of 2 Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [in short '' POCSO Act''] was filed. The petitioner was acquitted by judgment dated 19/01/2019 passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Second Additional Sessions Judge, District Guna passed in Special Sessions Trial No.25/2017. Thereafter, by letter dated 22/04/2019 (Annexure P9), the petitioner has been informed that the Scrutiny Committee by its order dated 08/03/2019 has held that the petitioner is unfit for his appointment on the post of Constable. Although the copy of the order dated 08/03/2019 passed by the respondent No.3 has not been placed on record but by IA 6041/2019, the petition was amended seeking quashment of the order dated 08/03/2019.

3. Considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner.

4. In the entire writ petition, the petitioner has not disclosed as to whether any pendency of criminal case was disclosed in his character verification form or not? However, one thing is clear that the allegations against the petitioner were of kidnapping a minor girl and committing rape on her. Mere acquittal of a candidate in a criminal case would not ipso facto make him entitled for his recruitment, but the employer is well -within his right to consider the effect of registration of criminal case.

5. The Supreme Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh and Others vs. Abhijit Singh Pawar , passed in Civil Appeal No. 11356 of 2018 (Arising out of SLP (c) No.17404 of 2016) by judgment dtd. 26th November, 2018 has observed as under:-

'' 14. In Avtar Singh (supra), though this Court was principally concerned with the question as to non-disclosure or wrong disclosure of information, it was observed in paragraph 38.5 that even in cases where a truthful disclosure about a concluded case was made, the 3 employer would still have a right to consider antecedents of the candidate and could not be compelled to appoint such candidate.

15. In the present case, as on the date when the respondent had applied, a criminal case was pending against him. Compromise was entered into only after an affidavit disclosing such pendency was filed. On the issue of compounding of offences and the effect of acquittal under Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C., the law declared by this Court in Mehar Singh (supra), specially in paragraphs 34 and 35 completely concludes the issue. Even after the disclosure is made by a candidate, the employer would be well within his rights to consider the antecedents and the suitability of the candidate. While so considering, the employer can certainly take