Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 13489
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Mr. Manish Garg, J, Dr. Anand S. Khati, A
Rishabh Maan – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Police – Respondent
O.A. No. 47/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Anil Singal
For the Respondents: Mr. L. C. Singhi, Ms. Purnima Maheshwari
An acquittal in criminal cases cannot justify the denial of public employment, particularly when the role is non-enforcement.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 207, 313 - Indian Penal Code - Sections 186, 332, 353, 325, 323 - Recruitment to police service - Cancellation of candidature based on past criminal involvement despite acquittal - Acquittal wipes out stigma; mere past involvement does not amount to disqualification for public employment. (Paras 1, 6, 7)
(B) Judicial principles - Nature of offences and acquittal must be assessed without prejudice; Screening Committees can only deny appointment if past conduct indicates moral turpitude. (Paras 6.5, 6.6, 7.2)
Facts of the case:
The applicant’s selection was cancelled despite full disclosure of two criminal cases leading to acquittals. Challenged orders claimed arbitrary actions disregarding legal principles and the applicant’s rights.
Findings of Court:
The basis for cancellation lacked legal standing due to the applicant’s acquittal and the nature of his duties not requiring policing skills; thus, he was deemed suitable for the post.
Issues: Whether an acquittal can disqualify an applicant from police service based on past involvement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that an acquittal should favor the candidate unless the past conduct reveals serious moral issues; in this context, cancellation lacks justification.
Result: The Application was allowed, ordering the applicant’s immediate reinstatement as Head Constable (Ministerial).
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application seeking reinstatement after acquittal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments on arbitrary cancellation of candidature. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. legal standing on rehabilitation and employment post acquittal. (Para 5) |
| 4. court’s directive for reinstatement and benefits. (Para 7) |
ORDER
Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :
In the present Original Application, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:
“(i) To call for the records of the case and quash/set aside the impugned SCN dt. 21.03.2024 & Order dt. 09.12.2024 and proceedings of Screening Committee on the basis of which impugned orders were passed and direct the respondents to issue letter of appointment to the applicant for the post of HC (Min.) with all consequential benefits including seniority/promotion and arrears of pay since the applicant is still unemployed.
(ii) To award costs in favor of the applicant and pass any order or orders which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem just & equitable in the facts & circumstances of the case.”
2. The brief facts of the case as narrated by the learned counsel for the applicant are as under:
2.1. The present case arises from the cancellation of the candidature of the applicant for the post of Head Constable (Ministerial) in Delhi Police. The respondents have cancelled his selection on the ground of his past involvement in two criminal cases, despite his complete acquittal in both. The impugned Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 21.03.2024, Order dated 09.12.2024, and the proceedings of the Screening Committee are under challenge on the basis that the same are arbitrary, illegal, and violative of the applicant’s rights.
2.2. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant had applied for recruitment to the post of HC (Min.) in Delhi Police under Recruitment-2022. He disclosed in his application form the details of two criminal cases, FIR No. 80/2017, P.S. Mundka, and FIR No. 4/2019, P.S. Nangloi, both of which resulted in his acquittal vide judgments dated 04.07.2019 and 03.07.2024 respectively. The relevant portions of the said judgments read as under:
“Judgment dated 04.07.2019
It is submitted by the complainant/victim/injured that he has voluntarily settled the matter with the accused before Delhi Mediation Centre, vide mediation No. 4842/19/Ex. P1 and is no more interested in prosecuting the accused and seeks permission of the Court to compound the offence punishable under Section 323 /341/34 IPC.
Heard. File perused.
I have examined the victim about his voluntariness and having examined him, I am satisfied that he is making statement voluntarily. Therefore, let his statement to this effect be recorded separately. Statements recorded.
File perused. Perusal of the file reveals that accused is sent to face trial for the offences punishable under sections 323/341/34 IPC.
Section 323 IPC is compoundable within the scheme of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the person to whom hurt is caused while section 341 IPC is compoundable by the person restrained. in Therefore, view of statement of complainant/victim/injured, accused Rishab stands acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 323 /341/34 IPC.”
Judgment dated 03.07.2024
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION
1. Briefly stated, accused Rishabh Maan was sent to face trial with the allegations that on 08.05.2019, at about 02:15 PM, at MRS Mundka Parking, Delhi, within jurisdiction of PS Nangloi Metro, accused Rishabh Maan obstructed public servants Ct. Jaiveer and CL. Sandeep, caused grievous hurt to Ct. Jaiveer, simple hurt to Ct. Sandeep to deter them for discharging their duties as public servants and also assaulted them while they were on PCR Duty and thereby, it has been alleged that accused has committed an offence under Section 186 /332/353/325/323 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "IPC").
2. Investigation was carried out and upon completion, the instant charge-sheet alleging an offence punishable under Section 186 /332/353/325/323 of IPC was filed agai
