Summary
The Court restored a CRPF constable’s removal for deliberately concealing pending criminal cases and custody when completing his verification roll. Prior release on bail established his knowledge, and a subsequent acquittal on benefit of doubt did not cure the nondisclosure. The disciplinary inquiry had afforded a fair opportunity to defend himself.
Issues
- Whether the constable knowingly concealed criminal cases, custody and bail in his verification roll.
- Whether subsequent acquittal or youth required reinstatement or a lesser penalty.
- Whether the employer’s disciplinary decision was fair and proportionate.
Held
- The respondent’s custody and successful bail application preceded his verification roll and established knowledge of the criminal proceedings. His negative answers to specific questions and later denial were therefore deliberate concealment, contrary to the High Court’s factual premise. (¶¶ 15, 16, 17, 24, 26)
- The inquiry afforded participation, witness statements, cross-examination and defence evidence. It also found that favourable police reports and certificates supplied by the respondent had not been issued by the authorities they purported to come from. (¶¶ 7, 8, 18)
- The later acquittal resulted from insufficient evidence and benefit of doubt. More fundamentally, removal was based on failure to disclose the cases truthfully, rather than merely their pendency or eventual outcome. (¶¶ 19, 23)
- Applying Avtar Singh and related decisions, an employer must consider the circumstances, duties and nature of the post when assessing antecedents and suppression. Deliberate concealment of multiple pending cases is significant, and law-enforcement posts demand particularly rigorous standards of integrity. (¶¶ 20, 21, 22, 25)
- The employer exercised its discretion reasonably after fair disciplinary proceedings. On these facts removal was neither arbitrary nor mala fide nor unduly harsh, and youth did not warrant substituting a minor penalty. (¶¶ 25, 26, 27)
Result
Appeal allowed; Single Judge and Division Bench judgments directing reinstatement set aside. Disciplinary removal order and appellate confirmation restored and upheld. Parties to bear their own expenses.