Patna High Court
Dinesh Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 8 September, 2025
Author: Partha Sarthy
Bench: Partha Sarthy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12399 of 2025
======================================================
Dinesh Kumar Son of Bisar Yadav, Resident of Village- Bangla Kothi, P.O.-
Belawon, P.S.- Kaler, District- Arwal, Pin- 824127.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Home (Police)
Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director General of Police, Bihar.
3. The D.I.G. of Police, Begusarai Range, Begusarai.
4. The Superintendent of Police, Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Mayanand Jha, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Gaurav Prakash, Advocate
Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, AC to GP-20
Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, AC to GP-20
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 08-09-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for
the following relief(s):
"i. For issuance of an appropriate
writ/order/direction for setting aside the order of
termination from service passed by the Superintendent
of Police, Begusarai vide District Order No.
1550/2024 as contained in Memo No.4656 dt.
13.9.2024
.
ii. For setting aside Appellate order passed by
the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Begusarai
Range, Begusarai, as contained in Memo No.300
Patna High Court CWJC No.12399 of 2025 dt.08-09-2025
dt.21.11.2024 and consequential Ziladesh No. 1976 /
2024 bearing Memo No.5644 dt. 6.12.24 issued by the
S.P., Begusarai, whereby he rejected the Appeal
preferred by the petitioner against order of
termination passed by the S.P., Begusarai.
iii. For setting aside the order passed by the
D.G.Police, Bihar, Patna rejecting the
Memorial/revision filed by the petitioner vide Memo
No. 218 dt.2.6.2025 and consequential Ziladesh No.
1066/2025 bearing Memo No.2401 dt. 15.6.2025
issued by the S.P., Begusarai.
iv. For issuance of order/direction to reinstate
the petitioner in service from the date of termination
with consequential benefits;
v. For grant of any other relief / reliefs to which
the petitioner may be entitled to, in the eyes of this
Hon'ble Court."
3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the Central
Selection Board for Constable recruitment in Bihar Police
came out with Advertisement no.5 of 2020 for filling up
posts of Constables. The petitioner having cleared the
written examination, the screening test as also the physical
test was selected and recommended for appointment in
Begusarai district. He was appointed as a Constable in the
Bihar Police on 19.10.2022 and gave his joining in
Begusarai District Police. He was issued temporary
Constable no.351.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that after his joining,
Patna High Court CWJC No.12399 of 2025 dt.08-09-2025
he filled up the character verification form wherein in
response to a query as to whether the applicant was ever
accused in any criminal or civil case or had been
imprisoned, the petitioner replied in the negative.
5. On a report being sought by the Superintendent of
Police, Begusarai, it transpired that the petitioner was an
accused in Kaler P.S. Case no.49 of 2018 registered on
13.10.2018 under sections 323, 341, 379, 427, 504 and 34 of
the Indian Penal Code and section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) and
3(2)(va) of the S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989. On receipt of the report about the petitioner being an
accused, a show cause was issued by the Superintendent of
Police, Begusarai on 17.3.2023 to which the petitioner filed
his reply on 30.5.2023.
6. A departmental proceeding bearing no.56 of 2023
was started on 28.3.2024 wherein the petitioner appeared
and filed his reply. The conducting officer submitted his
enquiry report on 31.7.2024. A copy of the enquiry report
was made available to the petitioner who on being directed
filed his reply to the show cause on 13.8.2024.
7. The Superintendent of Police, Begusarai by order
dated 13.9.2024 passed the order of punishment terminating
Patna High Court CWJC No.12399 of 2025 dt.08-09-2025
the petitioner from service. Being aggrieved by the order of
termination, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the
D.I.G., Begusarai, however, the appeal was rejected on
21.11.2024. The petitioner thereafter preferred a memorial
before the Director General of Police, Bihar which also
came to be rejected on 2.6.2025. The petitioner has
preferred the instant application against the order of his
termination as also the orders rejecting his appeal and
memorial. The petitioner has further prayed that he be
reinstated in service from the date of termination with
consequential benefits.
8. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner that the petitioner was accused in two cases i.e.
Arwal S.C./S.T. P.S. Case no.16 of 2018 dated 3.9.2018 as
also Kaler P.S. Case no.49 of 2018 dated 13.10.2018.
Though the cases had been lodged earlier, as the parties had
orally entered into a compromise, the petitioner was under
the impression that the case had come to an end and as such,
the petitioner had filled up in his form that he was not an
accused in any case. Learned counsel submits that
furnishing of incorrect information should have been
considered by the respondents objectively on due
Patna High Court CWJC No.12399 of 2025 dt.08-09-2025
consideration of the fact that ultimately the petitioner had
been implicated in the case because of land dispute and in
both the cases, the parties had entered into a compromise
and the petitioner had been acquitted. In support of his
contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on
the judgments in the case of Commissioner of Police, Delhi
& Anr. vs. Dhabal Singh; (1991) 1 SCC 246, Avtar Singh
vs. Union of India & Ors; (2016) 8 SCC 471 and Pawan
Kumar vs. Union of India & Anr.; (2023) 12 SCC 317. It
is thus submitted that the orders impugned be set aside and
the petitioner be reinstated in service with consequential
benefits.
9. It was submitted by learned counsel appearing for
the respondents that the matter relates to appointment as
Constable in police force. On having been appointed as a
Constable, the petitioner was required to fill up the character
verification form, a copy of which has been brought on
record as Annexure P/2 to the writ petition. Inspite of the
petitioner being in know of the fact that he was an accused
in two cases registered in the year 2018, nevertheless he
incorrectly answered the query in the negative. It is
submitted that there is absolutely no explanation for the
Patna High Court CWJC No.12399 of 2025 dt.08-09-2025
incorrect statement made and the respondents having
followed the procedure laid down rightly terminated the
petitioner from service. There is no illegality in the order of
termination nor in the orders passed in appeal or memorial
and as such, the instant application be dismissed.
10. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the respondents and perused the material on
record.
11. The relevant facts in brief are that the petitioner
having succeeded in the written examination followed by
the screening and physical test held for appointment of
Constable in Bihar Police against Advertisement no.5 of
2020, he submitted his joining in the Begusarai District
Police with temporary Constable no.351.
12. On being asked to fill up the character verification
form, on 28.9.2022, the petitioner filled up the same in his
own handwriting. Clause 7 of the form was a query as to
whether the applicant has been an accused in any criminal or
civil matter and whether he had been imprisoned. The
applicant was further directed to give the details thereof.
13. In reply to the said query, the petitioner answered
in the negative by writing 'no'.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12399 of 2025 dt.08-09-2025
14. It is not in dispute that in the year 2018 itself, the
petitioner had been made accused in two cases ie (i) Arwal
S.C./S.T. P.S. Case no.16 of 2018 dated 3.9.2018 registered
under sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 427, 354 and 504 of the
Indian Penal Code and sections 3(2)(va) of S.C. and S.T.
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and (ii) Kaler P.S. Case
no.49 of 2018 dated 13.10.2018 registered under sections
323, 341, 379, 427, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and
section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the S.C. and S.T.
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It is also not in dispute
that four years later while filling the form on 28.9.2022, the
petitioner was aware of the fact that he was accused in the
two cases, however, he suppressed the same.
15. A bare perusal of Clause 7 of the form, at
Annexure-P/2, would show that the erroneous impression of
the petitioner that both the matters had been compromised
and the cases had come to an end is of no significance for
the reason that Clause 7 does not state that details of only
those cases are to be given which are pending or in which
the applicant has been convicted. Clause 7 asks for the
details of all cases including criminal and civil wherein the
applicant may have been made accused or was a party.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12399 of 2025 dt.08-09-2025
16. So far as the judgments relied on by learned
counsel for the petitioner are concerned, in the case of
Dhabal Singh (supra), it was the respondents who had
voluntarily conveyed to the appellant that he had
inadvertently failed to mention about the pendency of the
criminal case against him in the appropriate column. In
Avtar Singh (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court was of the
opinion that for determining suppression or false
information attestation/verification form has to be specific
and not vague. Only such information which was required to
be specifically mentioned had to be disclosed. Further, in
Pawan Kumar (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court
observed that the effect of suppression of involvement in a
criminal case is left for the employer to consider and mere
suppression of material information in a given case does not
mean that the employer can arbitrarily terminate the
employee from service.
17. In the opinion of the Court, none of the judgments
cited herein above are of any assistance to the petitioner in
the facts of the case. Inspite of being conscious of two cases
which were pending since the year 2018, the petitioner
failed to mention about the same while filling up the form in
Patna High Court CWJC No.12399 of 2025 dt.08-09-2025
the year 2022. It was only on the respondents coming to
know about the incorrect information having been furnished
with respect to pendency of criminal cases by the petitioner
and issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner on
17.3.2023 that subsequent thereto the compromise petitions
were filed in the two cases on 20.3.2023 and 9.12.2024 and
the criminal cases ended in judgment of acquittal on
23.4.2024 and 24.1.2025 respectively.
18. The petitioner has not been able to point out any
illegality in the proceedings or in the order of termination
nor in the orders passed in appeal or memorial.
19. The Court finds no merit in the instant application
and the same is dismissed.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Saurabh/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 08.09.2025
Transmission Date N/A
