Suppression of Criminal Record in Verification Form: Apex Court Analysis
Suppression of criminal record in verification form would not reject candidature without giving him reasonable opportunity.
Suppression of Criminal Record in Verification Form
Police registered a Criminal Case against the petitioner on 25 Oct 1997 under Sections 465, 468 and 471 of IPC with an allegation that he had fraudulently prepared a forged caste certificate.
However, ACJM discharge the accused as prosecution failed to produce sufficient evidence.
Thereafter, respondent notified vacancies through publication on 23 February 2011 for holding recruitment and selection of constables in Railway Protection Force.
In pursuance to the advertisement, respondents started selection process in June 2014 and after undergoing the process of selection respondent finally selected the appellant.
Respondent sent the appellant for training to Police Recruit Training Centre, Hoshiarpur by letter dated 7 October 2014.
False Information at the time of Joining Service
During training, respondent passed an Order for cancellation of his appointment on 19 Feb 2015 on the premise of non-disclosure of criminal record registered in 1997.
Even Department found it later on that applicant gave false information in attestation form before joining Service.
The Apex Court’s settled law says ” no termination without departmental inquiry.”
Hiding of Criminal Record in Attestation Form
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the impugned termination Order.
Petitioner submitted before the High Court that criminal matter had resolved and concluded years ago, therefore, the petitioner wrote no criminal case is pending.
Minor Offences can Debar from Employment ?
The learned Single Judge, after taking into consideration the material available on record and also the fact that a juvenile committed an offence in the year 1997.
Also the fact that the learned trial Judge of Criminal Court had passed the order of discharge dated 15th December, 2001.
Accordingly, Hon’ble Single Judge held that it is not a case of suppression of material information which may deprive him of his appointment.
And set aside the order of cancellation dated 19th February, 2015 with a direction to reconsider the case of the appellant vide Order dated 20 Jan 2016.
Decision of Division Bench of High Court
Respondent challenge the Order dated 20 Jan 2016 before the Division Bench of the High Court overturn the Single Judge’s Order.
And held that since petitioner did not disclosed the fact of criminal case once registered against him appears to be the material suppression.
Appeal before Apex Court of India
The petitioner filed an appeal before Apex Court challenging the High Court Order.
And submitted that once Criminal Court discharged the petitioner from all the criminal cases. Therefore, petitioner did not mentioned about the criminal record in Verification form.
Apex Court Judgment on Recruitment Matters
The Division Bench has proceeded mechanically, without considering that petitioner was juvenile in October 1997.
Also the facts that Trial Court had discharged him from criminal proceedings on 15th Dec 2001.
And almost a decade thereafter, the process of selection came to be initiated by the respondents pursuant to an advertisement dated 23rd February 2011.
The seriatim of facts cumulatively indicate that the nature of information which was not disclosed by the appellant, in any manner, could be considered to be a suppression of material information not being bona fidely disclosed in attestation form filled by him.
Therefore, the finding of Division Bench in holding that there was a suppression of material information is unsustainable and deserves to be set aside.
Conclusion
Accordingly, Apex Court allowed the appeal of the Petitioner.
And the Apex Court directed to respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits including salary, seniority, etc.
Case Reference :
Umesh chandra Yadav Versus IG, RPF Northern Railway, New Delhi & Others (Civil Appeal No. 1964 of 2022)
Frequently Asked Questions
What were the charges against the petitioner ?
Answer: Police charged the petitioner under Sections 465, 468, and 471 IPC for forging a caste certificate.
What happened to the criminal case filed ?
Answer: The ACJM discharged the petitioner in 2001 due to insufficient evidence produced by the prosecution.
When did the Railway Protection Force announce recruitment?
Answer: RPF announced constable recruitment through an advertisement published on 23 February 2011.
When was the petitioner sent for training?
Answer: Respondents sent the petitioner for training on 7 October 2014 at Police Recruit Training Centre, Hoshiarpur.
Why was the petitioner’s appointment cancelled?
Answer: Respondents cancelled the appointment on 19 February 2015 for suppressing criminal record in the attestation form.
What did the petitioner claim in his writ petition?
Answer: The petitioner claimed no case was pending when he filled the attestation form, as he was discharged.
What does settled law say about termination?
Answer: Answer: The Apex Court says no termination is valid without holding a proper departmental inquiry.
Was the petitioner a juvenile when the case was registered?
Answer: Yes, the petitioner was a juvenile when police registered the case in October 1997.
What did the Single Judge of High Court decide?
Answer: The Single Judge held no material suppression occurred and set aside the appointment cancellation order.
What did the Division Bench of High Court hold?
Answer: The Division Bench held that non-disclosure of criminal case amounted to suppression of material information.
What did the petitioner argue before the Apex Court?
Answer: The petitioner argued that discharge from the case removed any obligation to disclose it in forms.
What flaw did the Apex Court find in the Division Bench’s decision?
Answer: The Apex Court said Division Bench ignored petitioner’s juvenile status and long gap after case disposal.
What conclusion did the Apex Court reach?
Answer: The Apex Court held there was no willful suppression of material facts by the petitioner.
What did the Apex Court direct the respondents to do?
Answer: The Court directed respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits like salary and seniority.
What is the case citation for this judgment?
Answer: The case is Umesh Chandra Yadav v IG, RPF Northern Railway, Civil Appeal No. 1964 of 2022.
Read More : Minor Mistake in Application Form
Tags : Suppression of Criminal Record, False Information in Attestation Form, Criminal Record for Govt. Service