Not disclosing pendency of criminal case will cause rejection of application: HC

Chennai: The Madras high court has held that the failure of a person to disclose in the application form, either his involvement in a criminal case or the pendency of a criminal case against him, would entitle the appointing authority to reject his application on the ground of concealment of a material fact, irrespective of the ultimate outcome of the criminal case.

Justice R.Mahadevan gave the ruling while dismissing a batch of petitions from M. Malaiselvam, which sought to quash the orders of the authorities, denying appointment to the post of grade II police constable and police band party on the ground of suppression of involvement in criminal case or pendency of the same in the application form.

The judge said when the failure of a person to disclose his involvement in a criminal case when the application form is filled up, is fatal, his subsequent disclosure will not cure the defect and the same would give right
to the appointing authority to reject his candidature on the ground of
suppression and antecedents.

"The police force is a disciplined force. It shoulders the great responsibility of maintaining law and order and public order in 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 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", the judge added.

The judge said if the facts of the present cases were analyzed, this court has no hesitation to hold that the decision taken by the authorities concerned in rejecting the candidature of the petitioners was in any way actuated by mala fides or suffered on any other ground.

 "The decision on the question of suitability of the candidates, in my considered view, was absolutely correct and did not call for any interference", the judge added.