Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench: New Delhi O.A. No.2626/2025 This the 27th day of February, 2026 Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A)

Deepak Roll No. 2201067190 aged about 25 years S/o Mr. Krishan R/o Village & Post Office - Kasni, District - Jhajjar, Haryana – 124109 …Applicant (By Advocates: Mr. Setu Niket)

Versus

1. Union of India Through Secretary (Home) Ministry of Home Affairs North Block New Delhi-110001

2. Delhi Police Through Commissioner of Police Delhi Police Headquarters Behind Parliament Street Police Station New Delhi-110001

3. Deputy Commissioner of Police, Recruitment, Delhi Police Lines Kingsway Camp New Delhi-110009

4. Staff Selection Commission Through its Chairman Northern Region Block No. 12, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road New Delhi-110003 …Respondents (By Advocate: Mr. Ranjan Tyagi)

ORDER (ORAL)

By Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

In the present Original Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant seeks the following reliefs:-

“A. Call for records of the case;

B. Quash and set aside the impugned order dated

20.05.2025;

C. Direct the Respondents to appoint the Applicant in the post of Head Constable (AWO/TPO) Male & Female under EWS category with all consequential benefits including arrears of pay etc;

D. Award cost of the proceedings: and E. Pass any order/relief/direction(s) as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice in favour of the Applicant.”

2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant had applied for recruitment to the post of Head Constable (AWO/TPO) Male & Female in Delhi Police Examination, 2022, pursuant to the notification dated 08.07.2022 issued by the Staff Selection Commission. 2.1 The applicant, being eligible, applied under the EWS category before the last date i.e. 29.07.2022. It is submitted that the applicant appeared in the computer-based examination held on 28.10.2022, and upon declaration of result on 30.12.2022, the applicant was declared qualified for the further stages of recruitment including PET/PST and Trade Test.

2.2 Learned counsel submits that during the course of verification of antecedents, it was disclosed by the applicant that he was involved in FIR No. 293/2021, registered at Police Station Sahlawas, District Jhajjar (Haryana) under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 341, 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.3 It is submitted that the said case arose out of a neighbourhood altercation involving several persons. The applicant was subsequently tried before the competent criminal court and was acquitted vide judgment dated 08.11.2024. He draws attention to the findings recorded by the trial court. The trial court observed that the prosecution had failed to establish the link evidence against the accused persons. The relevant finding recorded reads as follows:

“……..The prosecution has completely falled to establish the link evidence In this case. Hence, on this ground also, the accused persons are entitled for acquittal.

17. In the given circumstances, the identity of accused persons vis a vis the offences alleged to be cominitted by them is not proved.

18. Furthermore, the possibility of a compromise between the prosecution witnesses and the accused outside the court-room cannot be ruled out, but this court is not to dwell upon surmises and conjectures but has to decide the case on basis of the evidence available on file. Suspicion however grave cannot take place of proof. The golden thread which runs in the administration of justice in criminal cases is that if on evidence adduced, two views are possible, then the one favouring the accused should be adopted. Paramount consideration of the court is to ensure that miscarriage of justice is prevented.

19. In view of the above discussion, the accused persons are hereby acquitted of the charges framed against them. Their bail bonds surety bonds furnished on the reco