Mere Unwanted Staring At A Woman's Chest In Office Does Not Constitute Voyeurism Under Section 354-C IPC: Bombay High Court State Cannot Justify Espionage FIR Based Solely On Custodial Disclosure Without Corroborative Evidence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail Mere Issuance Of Letter Of Intent Without Formal Work Order Does Not Create Concluded Contract Or Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court Executing Court Cannot Modify Terms Of Compromise Decree Merely Because Implementation Is Impracticable: Supreme Court Adjudicating Authority Only Needs To Check For 'Plausible' Pre-Existing Dispute Under Section 9 IBC, Not Its Success On Merits: Supreme Court Arguing Against Settled Law To Show Skill Wastes Court Time; Giving Up Such Arguments A Professional Virtue: Supreme Court Limitation Under Section 468 CrPC Is Computed From Date Of Filing Complaint, Not Date Of Cognizance: Supreme Court MSCS Act | Co-operative Society Can't Acquire Corporate Debtor Under IBC If Not In 'Same Line Of Business' As Per Its Bye-Laws: Supreme Court Multi-State Co-op Societies Can Only Invest In Entities With Substantially Similar Core Business Under Bye-Laws: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Usurp Governor's Statutory Discretion To Grant Extraordinary Pension Under 1981 Rules: Supreme Court Litigants Can Challenge Non-Appealable Interlocutory Orders In Final Appeal Under Section 105 CPC: Supreme Court Plaintiff Cannot File Fresh Suit For Title If Relief Was Omitted In Earlier Injunction Suit Arising From Same Dispute: Supreme Court Plaintiff's Failure To Enter Witness Box Draws Rebuttable Presumption, Not Fatal To Suit If Rebutted By Cogent Evidence: Supreme Court Sale Deeds Executed During Pendency Of Specific Performance Suit Hit By Doctrine Of Lis Pendens: Supreme Court EWS Certificates Must Relate To Correct Financial Year; Courts Should Not Routinely Interfere In Online Recruitment Rejections: Supreme Court Court Can Lift 'Veil Of Partnership' To Evict Tenants Using Reconstitution As Cloak For Unlawful Sub-Letting: Supreme Court State Cannot Fix Lower Dearness Relief Rate For Pensioners Than Dearness Allowance For Serving Employees: Supreme Court Prolonged Separation Indicates Matrimonial Bond Broken Beyond Repair: Supreme Court Upholds Divorce Over Wife's Cruelty Right To Contest Elections Distinct From Right To Vote, Co-Operative Societies Can Set Threshold Eligibility Conditions: Supreme Court Court Can Draw Adverse Inference Against Party Withholding Best Evidence, Has No Duty To Seek Production: Supreme Court Limitation | Delay Condonation Cannot Be An Act Of Generosity: Supreme Court Refuses To Condone 31-Year Delay To Challenge Decree Sentence Suspension In Murder Cases Only Under Exceptional Circumstances; Presumption Of Innocence Erased Upon Conviction: Supreme Court

Clean Acquittal Entitles Candidate to Police Appointment: Delhi HC Directs Appointment of SI Despite Past Criminal Case

06 November 2024 1:05 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


Delhi High Court set aside the Central Administrative Tribunal’s decision rejecting Manish Saini’s appointment as Sub-Inspector in Delhi Police. Justice C. Hari Shankar, alongside Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain, ruled that Saini’s acquittal in a 2011 robbery case was "clean," entitling him to join the police force. The court found that the Screening Committee’s assessment, which disqualified Saini based on alleged “criminal tendencies,” ignored the essence of his acquittal, amounting to a "non-application of mind."
Manish Saini had been charged in 2011 under Sections 398 and 401 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and relevant provisions of the Arms Act for allegedly attempting to rob passersby. He was acquitted in 2012, with the Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) in Sonepat dismissing the evidence as unreliable, citing inconsistencies among police witnesses and lack of independent corroboration.
Saini applied for the role of Sub-Inspector in the Delhi Police in 2017 and disclosed the acquittal on his application. After being provisionally selected, a Screening Committee in 2019 recommended canceling his appointment, asserting that the charges displayed a "criminal tendency." Following this, the Central Administrative Tribunal upheld the committee's decision in 2022, prompting Saini to file a writ petition before the Delhi High Court.
The High Court criticized the Screening Committee’s dismissal of Saini’s acquittal, emphasizing that the ASJ’s verdict lacked any suggestion of Saini’s guilt or "benefit of doubt." The court cited multiple Supreme Court rulings that “honourable acquittal” mandates appointment eligibility unless there is explicit evidence of misconduct.
The ASJ’s judgment underscored the absence of credible evidence and the improbability of the charges, rendering the prosecution's case "feeble and unbelievable." Based on this, Justice Shankar ruled that Saini’s acquittal must be considered “clean” and free from any "shadow of doubt."
"The Screening Committee has effectively sat in appeal over the judgment of the learned ASJ, which it was not competent to do,” the court stated. “The alleged possession of knives, which influenced the committee’s decision, was specifically discredited by the ASJ."
The High Court directed the Delhi government to appoint Saini as a Sub-Inspector from the date of selection with full seniority benefits, while denying back wages. This ruling reinforces the principle that a clean acquittal restores a candidate’s eligibility, particularly in public roles where integrity and character assessments are crucial.

 

Date of Decision: November 4, 2024
Manish Saini vs. Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr

 

Latest Legal News