The Supreme Court in the case Pramod Singh Kirar vs State of Madhya Pradesh observed and has directed the appointment of a candidate whose candidature was rejected on the ground that he was tried for the offence under Section 498A Indian Penal Code, 1860.
In the present case, Pramod Singh Kirar applied for the post of Constable in the year 2013 and he was found eligible to be appointed as Constable. Thus, he declared in the verification form itself that he was tried for the offence under Section 498A IPC earlier and was later acquitted in the said case. His candidature was later rejected on the ground that he was involved in this criminal case.
However, the Division bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court observed and has upheld this rejection wherein observing that if the candidate is found to be involved in a criminal case, even in the cases of acquittal and/or even in the cases where the employee has made declaration truthfully of a concluded criminal case the employer still has the right to consider antecedents, the same cannot be compelled for appointing the candidate. In an appeal, the Apex Court bench comprising of Justice MR Shah and Justice CT Ravikumar observed and has noted that the offence for which he was tried ultimately resulted into acquittal and the same had arisen out of the matrimonial dispute which ultimately ended and resulted in settlement out of the court. Further, it was noticed that there was no suppression of material fact in this case.
The bench observed and has stated that under the circumstances and in the peculiar facts of the case, the appellant could not have been denied the appointment solely on the aforesaid ground that he was tried for the offence under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and that too for the offences alleged to have happened in the year 2001 for which in the year 2006 he was even acquitted and may be on settlement (between husband and wife).
