Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. HARI SHANKAR, OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, JJ
SUMER SINGH – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. criminal cases disclosure during recruitment process. (Para 2) |
| 2. acquittal and its relevance in recruitment suitability. (Para 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. recruitment process for constable-cum-drivers initiated by cisf. (Para 4) |
| 4. policy guidelines regarding candidate's criminal history. (Para 8 , 10 , 12) |
| 5. requisitioning of documents related to criminal charges against candidates. (Para 9) |
| 6. quashing inadequate recruitment decision. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 7. court's decision to rescind disqualification based on acquired status post-acquittal. (Para 16) |
2. At the time of medical examination, the petitioner was required to disclose the pendency, against him, of any criminal cases. As FIR 495/2021 had been instituted against the petitioner under Section 420 of the IPC read with Section 63 of the Copyright Act , 1957, before the Police Station Jaipur Gramin, Kotputli, Rajasthan, this fact was truthfully disclosed by the petitioner. The allegation against the petitioner was that he was present in a shop in which counterfeit goods were being sold.
3. On the next day, i.e., 27 December 2023, the CISF referred the case of the petitioner, for consideration as to whether he was suitable for app
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
