Madhya Pradesh High Court
Akendra Raghuwanshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 October, 2024
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17640
1 WP-18623-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 4 th OF OCTOBER, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 18623 of 2017
AKENDRA RAGHUWANSHI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Rajeev Upadhyay, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri S.S. Kushwah, Government Advocate for respondents/State.
ORDER
With the consent of both parties, matter is finally heard.
2. Petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:-
"(i) That, the order dt. 04-09-2017 (annexure P/1) may
kindly be quashed.
(ii) That, the order dated 25-09-2017 (annexure P/2 may
kindly be queshed.
(iii) That, it may be held that the petitioner is eligible and
qualified to appoint on the post of Constable (Driver) and
consequently the respondents may kindly be directed to
appoint/join the petitioner on the post of Constable (Driver) and
accordingly all the benefits be given to the petitioner.
(iv) That, the other relief doing justice including cost be
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17640
2 WP-18623-2017
awarded."
3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has submitted his
candidature for the post of Police Constable in the respondent department.
Result of written examination was declared and petitioner was found
qualified for second stage. He also qualified in the physical test. He has
furnished all the information and stated in column 12 that two cases were
instituted against him, in which he has been acquitted in both the cases by
the competent Courts. Nothing has been suppressed by him. Respondent vide
impugned order dated 04.09.2017 (Annexure P-1) has declared
unfit/disqualified the petitioner for police services as his acquittal is not
found in the category of clean or hon'ble acquittal. He has been acquitted in
one criminal case on the basis of compounding offence and in other matter,
the concerned Court has passed the judgment under Section 232 of CrPC and
on the basis of non-availability of any evidence against him, he has been
acquitted. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid, petitioner has preferred this
petition.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/State, in their
written submission, submitted that as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India and others
reported (2016) 8 SCC 471 , it is a discretion of an employer to decide
whether the appointment of the petitioner is suitable in public interest or not,
which has been duly decided by the respondent in accordance with law.
Petitioner's acquittal cannot be considered as beyond reasonable doubt and
hon'ble acquittal, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17640
3 WP-18623-2017
petition deserves to be dismissed.
5. Learned counsel for both the parties heard at length and perused the
documents filed by them carefully.
6. Jurisdiction of the High Court in the writ petition under Article 226
of the Constitution of India is to examine the decision-making process, than
to act as Court of Appeal to substitute its own decision. In appropriate cases,
if the Court finds that decision-making process is arbitrary or illegal, the
Court will direct the authority for consideration rather than to substitute the
decision of the competent authority with that of its own. In the case at hand,
as evident petitioner has fairly disclosed the fact about the criminal cases,
wherein he was acquitted. This information apparently is the foundation of
passing of the impugned order dated 04.09.2017 (Annexure P-1). It is
admitted position that only Crime No.359/2015 at Police Station Mungawali,
District Ashoknagar, for offence under Sections 323, 341, 506 (Part-II) read
with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, has been registered against
the petitioner and vide order dated 14.06.2017 under Section 232 of CrPC, he
has been acquitted from the aforesaid charges. Another matter, i.e., Crime
No.360/2013 at Police Station Isagarh, District Ashoknagar for offence
under Sections 147, 294, 323, 325, 341 and 506-B of IPC has been registered
against the petitioner and on the basis of compounding the offence under
Section 320(2) of CrPC, he has been acquitted vide judgment dated
08.04.2017.
7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Avtar Singh (supra) held as
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17640
4 WP-18623-2017
under:-
"Where conviction has been recorded in case which is not
trivial in nature, employer may cancel candidature or terminate
services of the employee. In the concluded criminal cases, it has to
be seen what has been suppressed is material fact and would have
rendered an incumbent unfit for appointment. An employer would
be justified in not appointing or if appointed to terminate services
of such incumbent on due consideration of various aspects. Even
if disclosure has been made truthfully, the employer has the right
to consider fitness and while doing so effect of conviction and
background facts of case, nature of offence etc. have to be
considered. If acquittal had already been recorded in a case
involving moral turpitude or offence of heinous/serious nature, on
technical ground and it is not a case of clean acquittal, or benefit
of reasonable doubt has been given, the employer may consider all
relevant facts available as to antecedents, and may take
appropriate decision as to the continuance of the employee."
8. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh and
others Vs. Parvez Khan reported in (2015) 2 SCC 591 , it has been observed
in Paras 10 to 13 that:-
"Person having criminal antecedents would not fit into said
category since even if he is acquitted or discharged, it cannot be
presumed that he was completely exonerated - Persons likely to
erode credibility of police ought not to enter police force - On
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17640
5 WP-18623-2017
facts held, in absence of any allegations of mala fides against the
SP who was the appointing authority, or any perversity or
irrationality in his decision finding respondent ineligible for
compassionate appointment because of his implication in two
criminal cases, impugned judgment directing reconsideration of
respondent's case unsustainable"
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the order of
this Court in the case of Bhupendra Yadav Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and
others [W.A. No.46/2018 order dated 24.01.2018], order passed by the
Division Bench of this Court in the case of Pankaj Singh Tomar Vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh and others [W.A. No.723/2021, order dated 09.09.2024 ]
and judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in the case of Monu
Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others [W.A. No.55/2023, judgment
dated 24.07.2024] but facts and circumstances of all citations are
distinguishable with the facts of the present case, therefore, these citations
are not applicable in the instant matter.
10. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of
Avtar Singh (supra) and Parvez Khan (supra) , this Court is of the considered
opinion that acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically entitle the
petitioner for appointment to the post. Still it is open to the employer to
consider the antecedents and examine whether he is suitable for appointment
to the post. From the observations of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Parvez Khan (supra) , it is clear that a candidate to be recruited to the police
service must be impeccable character and integrity. A person having criminal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17640
6 WP-18623-2017
antecedents will not fit in this category. Even if he is acquitted or discharged,
it cannot be presumed that he was hon'ble acquitted or completely
exonerated. The decision of the Screening Committee must be taken as a
final unless it is shown to be malafide and decision of criminal Court on the
basis of compromise cannot be treated that the candidate possesses good
character, which may make him eligible, as the criminal proceedings are with
the view to find culpability of commission of offence, whereas the
appointment to the civil post as in view of his suitability to the post, whereas
the appointment to the civil post is in view of his suitability to the post. The
test for each of them is based upon different parameters, therefore, acquittal
in a criminal case is not a certificate of a good character to a candidate. There
is no allegation of malafide against the person taking said decision nor the
decision is shown to be perverse or irrational. There is no material to show
that the petitioner was falsely implicated.
11. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Parvez Khan (supra) , it is
also held in Para 35 that:-
"35. The police force is a disciplined force. It shoulders the
great responsibility of maintaining law and order and public order
in the society. People repose great faith and confidence in it. It
must be worthy of that confidence. A candidate wishing to join the
police force must be a person of utmost rectitude. He must have
impeccable character and integrity. A person having criminal
antecedents will not fit in this category. Even if he is acquitted or
discharged in the criminal case, that acquittal or discharge order
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17640
7 WP-18623-2017
will have to be examined to see whether he has been completely
exonerated in the case because even a possibility of his taking to
the life of crimes poses a threat to the discipline of the police
force........"
12. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the considered opinion
that the impugned order dated 04.09.2017 (Annexure P-1) passed by the
Screening Committee rejecting the claim of the petitioner for recruitment to
the police service is just and proper, therefore, no case is made out
warranting interference in this matter.
13. Accordingly, this petition being devoid of merit and substance is
hereby dismissed.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
Abhi
