Mere acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically confer entitlement to employment in a sensitive law enforcement role.

ORDER

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :

In the present O.A. filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“(i) Direct the Respondents to set aside and quash order dated 22.10.2024 and grant appointment to the Applicant w.e.f. the date when others who had participated in the examination and succeeded, were granted appointment;

(ii) Direct the Respondents to award all consequential benefits, including back wages, continuity of service, seniority, arrears of pay, fixation of pay at par with other similarly placed, to the Applicant; and

(iii) Any other or further order as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit.”

2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is a duly selected candidate for the post of Constable (Exe.) Male, who successfully cleared all stages of the recruitment process and truthfully disclosed his involvement in a criminal case leading to registration of FIR No. 31/2021 against him at PS – Naujheel, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh. The said case culminated in a clear acquittal by the court of competent jurisdiction vide judgment dated 07.03.2024, the relevant portion of which, reads as under:

“31. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances it is clear with analysis of aforesaid evidence and appropriate disclosure that the prosecution side has failed in proving all the charges leveled against accused persons Neeraj, Ajay and Satish. Therefore the accused persons Neeraj, Ajay and Satish are liable to be acquitted/discharged from the charges of offence leveled in case by Police Station Nauhjheel, District Mathura which are punishable U/s 323, 325, 336 and 506 Indian Penal Code .”

2.1. Highlighting the aforesaid, learned counsel argued that despite such acquittal, the respondents issued a Show Cause Notice dated 21.03.2024 questioning the applicant’s suitability solely on account of his past involvement in the criminal case. The applicant submitted a detailed reply explaining the circumstances of the case, the trivial nature of the dispute, and the judicial findings exonerating him. However, disregarding the acquittal, the respondents mechanically cancelled the applicant’s candidature vide the impugned order dated 22.10.2024, giving rise to the present Original Application.

3. Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the respondents have acted strictly in accordance with law, Standing Order No. HRD/12/2022, and settled judicial precedents governing recruitment to a disciplined force like Delhi Police. The candidature of the applicant was examined objectively after issuance of a Show Cause Notice and due consideration of his reply by the duly constituted Screening Committee.

3.1. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant was found involved in FIR No. 31/2021 registered under Sections 323 , 325, 336 and 506 of the IPC at PS Nauhjheel, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, and the said involvement was duly examined by the Screening Committee while assessing his suitability for appointment. Learned counsel added that appointment to a law enforcing agency demands a higher standard of integrity and suitability considering the nature of duties involving maintenance of law and order, handling of arms and ammunition, and protection of life and property of the public. The Screening Committee, while assessing the suitability of the applicant, took into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, the manner of acquittal, and the overall antecedents of the applicant. The acquittal in the criminal case was not a clean acquittal but one based on benefit of doubt