The acquittal under Section 232 of Cr.P.C. is sufficient grounds for reconsideration for employment unless proven otherwise; moral turpitude allegations need thorough exploration.

ORDER :

The petitioner has invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

1. The orders impugned Annexure P/1 and P/2 may kindly be quashed.

2. Respondents may kindly be directed to issue appointment order to the petitioner.

Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted.

1. Advertisement was made for the purpose of recruitment to the post of Constable (Driver). Examination was held. Petitioner secured merit position and respondents directed the petitioner to submit character verification form. The petitioner already informed about criminal case which was registered against the petitioner at Crime No. 249/2013. The petitioner further submitted that it is case of no evidence, therefore, under the provisions of Section 232 of Cr.P.C acquittal order has been passed.

2. Matter was placed before screening committee and on 21.2.2019 Screening Committee found him unsuitable for the post of Constable (Driver) on account of his involvement in the aforesaid criminal case. Consequently, the respondents passed the impugned order dated 13.06.2019 thereby declaring the petitioner unsuitable for appointment, that is how the petitioner is before this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents have failed to appreciate the judgment of acquittal passed in the Criminal Case inasmuch as the petitioner was acquitted by the learned trial Court under Section 232 of Cr.P.C. He submitted that the respondents have failed to take into account various judgments passed by this Court as also by Apex Court while rejecting the petitioner's candidature. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Devendra Singh Gurjar Vs. State of M.P. and others (W.A. No.1954/2019), Vijay Paras Vs. State of M.P. and others (W.A. No. 249/2021) and Monu Singh Vs. State of M.P. and others (W.A. No.55/2023). Learned counsel also placed reliance upon the judgment passed by Apex Court in the case of Avtar Singh vs Union Of India & Ors reported in (2016) 8 SCC 471 to say that the decision taken by the respondents suffers from non-application of mind.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents supported the impugned order and submitted that the petitioner was not honourably acquitted in the criminal case and his acquittal was on account of turning all witnesses hostile. In support of his submission, he placed reliance upon the judgment passed by Apex Court in the case of The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Bhupendra Yadav reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1181. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that the petitioner was involved in criminal case for offence under Section 435 read with Section 34 of IPC and such an offence falls under the category of moral turpitude as per the Circular, dated 24.07.2018. It is his submission that the Police force is a disciplined force and the members of such force shoulders great responsibility of maintaining law and order in society. The people of society repose faith and confidence in the members of Police force and, therefore, a candidate who wish to join the Police force must be a person of utmost rectitude, must have unimpeccable character and integrity. It is his submission that the persons like petitioner who have criminal antecedents, are not suitable for appointment on the post of Constable. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of writ petition.

5. Considered the argumen