LAWS(SC)-2024-2-44

RAVINDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Decided On February 22, 2024
RAVINDRA KUMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF U.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The vexed question is back again. Is it a hard and fast and a cut and dried rule that, in all circumstances, non-disclosure of a criminal case (in which the candidate is acquitted) in the verification form is fatal for the candidate's employment? We think not and it ought not to be so too. Fortunately, we have a judicial chorus supporting our view. Each case will turn on the special facts and circumstances. We have endeavoured to analyse the applicable precedents and have followed those line of cases, which have a striking similarity to the facts at hand.

(2.) Ravindra Kumar (the appellant), on 12/2/2004, applied for the post of Constable. His record was unblemished. Five days after submitting the application, i.e. on 17/2/2004, he was embroiled in a criminal case for offences punishable under Ss. 324, 352 and 504 Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC"), which he claims was a false case. He cleared the written exam and the interview. Earlier he had cleared the physical efficiency test too.

(3.) In the meantime, the criminal case took an interesting turn as by the judgment dtd. 13/9/2004, the appellant was acquitted. At that criminal trial, the informant PW-1 Srikant, who according to the prosecution, was allegedly injured in the incident on account of injuries allegedly inflicted by the appellant and by Vijendra, Ishwar Dayal and Radhey Shyam, turned hostile. The son of the informant, PW-2 Ram Gulam with whom according to the prosecution, the accused party was quarreling, till PW-1 Srikant intervened and allegedly became subject to physical attack, also turned hostile. Ram Gulam clearly deposed that he could not identify any of the accused. The witnesses even stated that the Daroga Ji (Station House Officer) did not record their statement. In the cross- examination, they also stated that there was a big crowd at the occurrence and as such they could not identify the assailants. Insofar as Sec. 504 IPC was concerned which deals with intentional insult with the intent to provoke breach of peace, both the parties have filed a compromise memo, which was accepted by the Court. In view of the above, they were acquitted of all the charges.