Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Suppression of Criminal Case Involvement Disqualifies Candidate from Police Job: Supreme Court”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 20 October 2023, In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that the suppression of involvement in a criminal case, even if followed by acquittal, can disqualify a candidate from securing a job in the police force. The decision came in the case of The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu, Chennai, versus J. Raghunees, in Civil Appeal No. 1183 of 2012.

The bench, led by Justice Pankaj Mithal, observed, “Information given by the candidate to the employer as to his conviction, acquittal, arrest, or pendency of a criminal case, whether before or after entering into service must be true and there should be no suppression or false mention of required information.”

The case revolved around the respondent, J. Raghunees, who was selected as a Grade-II Constable but failed to disclose his prior involvement in a criminal case during the verification process. Although he had been acquitted in the case, the court found that his failure to provide this information constituted suppression of material facts.

The court further emphasized that even if a candidate makes a truthful declaration of a concluded criminal case, the employer retains the right to consider the candidate’s antecedents and is not compelled to appoint them. In Raghunees’ case, the non-disclosure of his involvement in the criminal case, despite subsequent acquittal, raised doubts about his character and antecedents, leading to his disqualification from employment.

The judgment highlights the importance of complete and honest disclosure in matters of employment eligibility, particularly in the recruitment of individuals to disciplined forces such as the police. The decision reinforces the principle that candidates must provide accurate information about their criminal history, regardless of the outcome, to maintain transparency and integrity in the recruitment process.

This ruling serves as a reminder to job seekers that withholding information related to criminal cases can have serious consequences, even if they have been acquitted, and underscores the need for full transparency when applying for positions in the public service, especially law enforcement agencies.

Date of Decision: 20 October  2023

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE TAMILNADU, vs RAGHUNEES       

Latest Legal News