RAJU PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

(2.) THE petitioner was an applicant for appointment on the post of Sub -Inspector of Police. At the stage of his character verification, he was required to fill up a form, column 7 of which questions, if he was accused in a criminal case or has undergone custody in a criminal case. Learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly stated though the acquittal in the criminal case was on 30.7.2008, the verification form was filled in by the petitioner prior to that date on 8.7.2008 and in which he had stated that he was not an accused in a criminal case. The submission is that consequent to his acquittal on 30.7.2008 in the criminal case the verification even if erroneous becomes irrelevant and taking a sympathetic view of the matter, the petitioner is liable to be considered for appointment as he has otherwise been found successful. The impugned order dated 9.9.2009, therefore, merits interference in light of certain orders of this Court in CWJC No. 3338 of 2009.

(3.) THE factual position is that prior to his exoneration in the criminal trial, the petitioner has wrongly stated in his application form that he was not an accused in a criminal case. The significance of the appointment in a uniformed disciplined force at this stage cannot be lost sight of. From the order of this Court in CWJC No. 3338 of 2009, it does not appear as to what was the factual situation obtaining therein on the relevant date.