Delhi High Court

‘Tattoo Removal Scar No Barrier to Joining Delhi Police’: HC

The Delhi High Court recently ruled that a scar left from tattoo removal cannot be used as a reason to disqualify a candidate from joining the Delhi Police.

A division bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Girish Kathpalia made this observation while upholding a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) decision that supported the candidacy of Deepak Yadav, who had applied for a constable position in the Delhi Police.

Yadav had previously been deemed unfit for the Delhi Police by the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) due to a faded tattoo on his right forearm, which was noted during a medical examination. The High Court observed that Yadav was undergoing a tattoo removal procedure at the time.

By the time the case reached the High Court, the division bench found that the tattoo had been replaced by a very faint scar on Yadav’s forearm. The Court noted that such scars can be natural and should not be a reason to reject Yadav’s candidacy, thus affirming the relief previously granted by the CAT.

“We have physically examined the right forearm of the respondent (Yadav) and observed that the tattoo is not even visible to the naked eye… According to us, there is no clearly visible tattoo on the respondent’s forearm. Instead, there is a very dim scar. Such scars can be natural and, therefore, candidates should not be rejected on this ground,” the bench stated.

The Court also observed that if a candidate has an objectionable tattoo, they are typically given a set timeframe to have it removed. Failure to do so may result in rejection of their candidature. In this case, the Court noted that the initial medical examination took place on January 20, followed by an examination by the Review Medical Board on January 22, 2024. During this period, Yadav was already undergoing tattoo removal surgery, which is why the tattoo appeared faded on his forearm.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International

Nunnem Gangte

Recent Posts

Defamation Case: “Raut Didn’t Take Care & Caution, Caused Complainant Agony”- Mumbai Court

A Mumbai court has convicted Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut in a defamation case…

10 hours ago

1984 Anti-Sikh Riots Tytler Case: Delhi Court Records Statement Of Lakhvinder Kaur

The Rouse Avenue court on Thursday recorded the emotional testimony of Lakhvinder Kaur, widow of…

10 hours ago

Satyendar Jain Says Probe In Money Laundering Case Incomplete, Seeks Default Bail In Delhi HC

Former minister Satyendar Jain, currently in jail, urged the Delhi High Court on Thursday to…

10 hours ago

Tirupati Laddus Row: SC To Hear Pleas Seeking Court-Monitored Probe On Oct 4

The Supreme Court is set to hear a series of petitions on Friday regarding the…

11 hours ago

SC Scraps Caste-Based Discrimination In Prisons, Terms It Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a groundbreaking judgment on Thursday, declaring caste-based discrimination in…

11 hours ago

Mahadev Betting App Case: SC Gives Bail To Chhattisgarh Businessman

The Supreme Court on Thursday has granted bail to Chhattisgarh businessman Sunil Dammani, who was…

11 hours ago