Summary
The Court upheld restoration of a selected CISF Sub-Inspector’s appointment after rejection based on an earlier criminal case arising while he was a minor. He had disclosed the case and acquittal fully. Applying the juvenile fresh-start principle, the Court found no special circumstances justifying adverse reliance on those allegations in this case. The acquittal and juvenile status could not be treated as disqualifying him from the offered employment.
Issues
- Whether an acquitted case arising during minority justified denying the selected candidate’s CISF appointment.
- Whether there was suppression of criminal antecedents.
Provisions considered
- Section 3(xiv), Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015The fresh-start principle supported non-stigmatising treatment of the candidate’s juvenile record; the special-circumstances exception did not apply on these facts. (¶ 9)
Held
- The allegations concerned conduct while the respondent was below eighteen, and the charges had not been proved. In these circumstances the alleged conduct did not justify the adverse employment consequence imposed. (¶¶ 8, 9)
- The juvenile legislation sought reintegration without enduring stigma. Applying the fresh-start principle to this case, even conviction for the alleged juvenile conduct would not have supplied the relied-on job disqualification; no special circumstances were established. (¶ 9)
- The respondent had disclosed the charges and acquittal rather than concealing them. There was consequently no suppression ground to deny the position for which he had been selected and offered appointment. (¶¶ 3, 10)
Result
Union’s appeal dismissed. Respondent entitled to all benefits of the writ court’s judgment within thirty days of this judgment. No order as to costs.