Suppression of criminal case information does not automatically disqualify compassionate appointment; objective evaluation required.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 01-12-2025

Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for a direction to the respondent authorities to appoint him on compassionate ground on the post of constable on the ground of the father of the petitioner, who was posted as Trained Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police (Training) in Police Line at Buxar, having died in harness on 16.1.2020.

3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that his father who was appointed as a constable in the Bihar Police in the year 1979 was promoted as Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police. At the time of his death on 16.1.2020, he was working as Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police (Training) at Police Line in Buxar. On the death of his father, the petitioner applied for his appointment on compassionate ground and his case was recommended by the District Compassionate Committee headed by the Superintendent of Police, Buxar in its meeting held on 12.1.2021.

4. In the subsequent verification of his character, it transpired that the petitioner was an accused in an FIR being Simri P.S. Case no. 129 of 2014 registered on 16.7.2014 under sections 341, 323, 379 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code , section 3 of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 . This fact with respect to his being an accused in the said case registered in the year 2014 was suppressed by the petitioner in his application for compassionate appointment. It further transpires that pursuant to the respondents coming to know about the case, the Superintendent of Police, Buxar wrote a letter dated 23.8.2024 to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Shahabad Range, Dehri-on-Sone stating therein that as such, it would not be advisable to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground.

5. It is submitted by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner not having been appointed inspite of the recommendation of the District Compassionate Committee and the Superintendent of Police having written the letter dated 23.8.2024 to the DIG, Shahabad Range recommending that the petitioner not be appointed on compassionate ground on account of having suppressed the fact of his being an accused in a criminal case has lead to the petitioner filing the instant application for a direction to the respondents to appoint him on compassionate ground.

6. Learned Senior counsel submitted that it is not in dispute that the FIR was registered in the year 2014. However, the accused persons therein including the petitioner herein having moved this Court in Cr. Misc. no. 18861 of 2017 for quashing the order taking cognizance, this Court by its order dated 24.11.2017 stayed further proceedings in connection with the said case. Subsequently, the order taking cognizance was quashed by order dated 24.8.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. no. 18861 of 2017.

7. In view of the aforesaid facts, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that even in case of such suppression with respect to pendency of criminal case while being appointed in different services including the police service, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in different cases has held that the recruit is not to be discharged/terminated by stroke of pen. Instead, it is for the employer to consider all the relevant facts and circumstances including the relevant rules, the nature of the offence and mere suppression of material information does not mean that the employer can arbitrarily discharge/terminate the employee from service.

8. It is further submitted that though