The court ruled that a candidate's appointment should not be hindered by a pending criminal case if the case is quashed, emphasizing fair consideration in judicial appointments.

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 07-02-2025

We have heard Mr. Vishwajeet Kumar Mishra, the learned Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Piyush Lall, the learned Advocate for the High Court, Mr. Prabhat Kumar, the learned Advocate for the State of Bihar and Mr. Rajni Kant Jha, the learned Advocate for the Bihar Public Service Commission.

2. The petitioner has come before this Court seeking his appointment to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division), as he was ranked No. 35 in the merit-list issued by the BPSC against Advertisement No. 04/2020 [31^st Bihar Judicial Service Competitive Examination for the post of Civil Judges (Junior Division)].

3. Some facts would be necessary to understand the reason for his having approached this Court seeking such relief.

4. On 12.05.2023, after the publishing of the results, a communication was made to the High Court by the General Administration Department (GAD) of the Government of Bihar that the case of the petitioner for appointment has been kept in abeyance for the reason of a criminal case pending against him vide Khagaul P.S. Case No. 109/2022 dated 21.04.2022, instituted for the offences under Sections 304(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was arraigned as an accused in his capacity as the brother-in-law of the deceased. Incidentally, the case was lodged just before the petitioner was to appear in the interview for such competitive examination. Despite the efforts of the petitioner, who had made several representations to the BPSC as also before the other authorities to consider his case, the same was not done. Ultimately, his candidature was cancelled vide decision of the GAD of the State on 05.01.2024 on the ground of his having been charge-sheeted in that case.

5. Without referring to the various orders of this Court whereby the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail and was given the liberty to approach the authorities to consider his case in the light of the merits of the criminal case and the stay granted by the Courts, nothing had happened.

6. However, the prosecution against the petitioner has ultimately been quashed by order dated 13.08.2024 passed by a Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 78007 of 2023, which order was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

7. Coming back to the vacancy position, it appears that vide Advertisement No. 04/2020, 221 posts of the Civil Judges (Junior Division) was advertised. 88 seats were earmarked for Unreserved category candidates which included 33 posts for women.

8. We have referred to this position for the reason that the petitioner falls in Unreserved category.

9. The final results were published by the BPSC and 214 candidates were found to be successful. Out of the 88 seats earmarked for Unreserved category, the petitioner was also found to be successful and was placed at Serial No. 35 in the merit-list. Finally, out of 214 successful candidates, 211 were notified to join on probation. Since the candidature of the petitioner was kept on hold, his name was not included.

10. On 30.12.2022, vide a notification contained in Letter No. 23512 of the GAD, Government of Bihar, the High Court was informed that one Rakhi Kumari, falling under EBC category, was also not recommended for being appointed because of a criminal case pending against her. Later, it was discovered that one of the successful candidates in the Unreserved category, namely, Ashish Chandra did not appear before the Commission for verification of his certificates and, therefore, his candidature also was cancelled. In the meantime, two of the unsuccessful candidates, namely, Akash Kumar and Harindra Kumar Rai approached thi