Summary
The Supreme Court upheld rejection of a Rajasthan police constable candidate who had disclosed his criminal case but had been acquitted on benefit of doubt after witnesses turned hostile following compromise of the compoundable charges. Acquittal did not automatically establish suitability for police service. Given the serious allegations, this was not a clean acquittal; the later recruitment circular had to be read consistently with the Court’s precedents. The High Court’s orders interfering with the rejection were set aside.
Issues
- Whether disclosure and acquittal on benefit of doubt entitled the candidate to appointment as a police constable.
- Whether the 2017 circular rendered the authority’s rejection unlawful despite the nature and circumstances of the acquittal.
Held
- An acquittal does not automatically establish suitability for police service. The employer may consider the job profile, severity of the allegations and whether the acquittal was clean or resulted from benefit of doubt. Disclosure of the case does not eliminate that assessment. (¶¶ 14-16, 23-25)
- The respondent was alleged to have participated in the knife attack, rather than merely being present. After the compoundable offences were compromised, witnesses turned hostile on the remaining murder charge. The resulting benefit-of-doubt acquittal could hardly be characterised as clean. (¶ 23-25)
- The broadly worded circular of 28 March 2017 had to be read with the Supreme Court’s judicial pronouncements. On these facts, the competent authority’s reasoned rejection of 23 May 2017 was consistent with that law and did not warrant interference on the ground of the circular. (¶ 26-29)
Result
Appeal allowed. Division Bench judgment and Single Judge order set aside; rejection of candidature upheld. Parties to bear their own costs.