Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

police verification for govt job

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 03 April 2015 This query is : Resolved 
I am Siddhartha Singh from Himachal Pradesh..back in 2010 I met with road accident..i was on bike and I had collision with maruti car..I got injured as i was kid that time I ran away from the place later i gt to know that case under IPC 279 has been registered against me..it all went in court for almost five years and last year court gave a judgment and set me free from all charges...and the case is over now
but now the question is as I am selected in govt job and my employer going to do police verification and when i went to the police station they told me that they have to mention about the case in the report but the case is over now i don't why they have to mention about that case in the report..m very worried as it will ruin my chance of getting a govt job..please help me or suggest me what should I do ?
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Expert) 04 April 2015
Police is right. They will mention the case does not matter how much you bribe them. You probably have hidden this case from the questinaire attached to attestation form.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Expert) 04 April 2015
repeated

http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/Case-under-IPC-279-531201.asp
Guest (Expert) 04 April 2015
It was your duty to give description of your past record and the final status of the case through the attestation form. Now the police will make a mention about the case and its present status. But, concealment of facts may be your minus point. However, if already exonerated the case is not likely to affect your Government career.
Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 04 April 2015
No reply to repeated query.
ajay sethi (Expert) 04 April 2015
repeated query no reply
Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 04 April 2015
Sudhir Kumar sir..I have not filled any questionnaire yet...my employer will do police verification on its own..and it wasn't my fault and i am acquitted from all charges last year...is it still going to effect my Job ??
Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 04 April 2015
And everybody here are giving me different opinion about the same....
some are saying its going to effect and some are saying it will be an issue...
I am completely scared now..
alexander (Expert) 04 April 2015
why do you want to stay anonymous? at least select a good name!!!
Guest (Expert) 04 April 2015
If you have not yet filled any questionnaire/ form for police verification, there would be no charge of concealment of facts. However, if you are made to fill up the questionnaire/ proforma, must not hide any information, including that of your exoneration in the case. If you do that nothing would be taken adverse against you. Even on asking by police, must inform the police about facts of the case, but be sure before signing any statement that your version is not distorted or described short of the facts.
prabhakar singh (Expert) 04 April 2015
If you have not filled any previous questionnaire in which you were to tell
1. Have you ever been charged and tried of an offense?
2.The final result of the trial?

Then there is no problem at all even if police mentions about the case as it shall also mention about your acquittal in the case.
An acquittal means you did not commit offence.
In addition even a conviction in a criminal case of accident does not involve any moral turpitude and does not afford a reason of denial of employment to a candidate who has been found otherwise fit for the service.

You may face problem only if you were specifically asked by your employer either
while applying or at a subsequent stage about your this antecedent and you concealed it as that would amount to suppression of fact,a misconduct on your part.
Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 04 April 2015
Prabhakar singh sir...
when I was applying for the mentioned JOB written exam..
there was one column where it was written that..
' Whether any prosecution/detention/fine/conviction /sentence against you has been awarded by any court of law for any offence ? '

As I was not guilty I have written NO in that column...will it be treated as a suppression of fact ??
and if I have done a mistake I am ready to do anything or is there any way to turn it in my favor legally..if you could advice anything
Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 04 April 2015
PS Dhingra sir...thanks alot for your valuable suggestions but I think I have made a huge mistake while filling exam application form I did not mention about my case in the column
' Whether any prosecution/detention/fine/conviction /sentence against you has been awarded by any court of law for any offence ? '

I just wrte no as I was not guilty and was acquitted from all charges...
so it will be tretaed as suppression of fact..means there is no hooe left for me...or is there any way i can still work it out for me ? Coz i cleared this exam after years of hard work and its once in a lifetime oppurtunity..please suggest me a way to deal with this situation
Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 04 April 2015
Alexander sir..i am new here..wasn't familiar with the site...
i am not anonymous sir I have already mentioned my name in the post itself.
Isaac Gabriel (Expert) 04 April 2015
Don't get panic.It will not stand in the way of your getting appointed.Our Lci site is having clarification for your query.

http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/judiciary/Minor-supression-of-fact-of-pendancy-of-criminal-cse-is-no-big-issue-for-appointment-2893.asp#.VRInK_yUcbA
prabhakar singh (Expert) 04 April 2015
You should have disclosed the fact of prosecution in the criminal case even if you were acquitted.
Now it may become matter of court if they make a show cause and do not agree with your reply.

However in courts you can win as there is a SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT to save you.


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 1430 OF 2007



COMMR.OF POLICE AND ORS Appellant (s)

VERSUS

SANDEEP KUMAR Respondent(s)

O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the parties. This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the High Court of Delhi dated 31.07.2006.

The facts have been given in the impugned judgment and hence we are not repeating the same here, except wherever necessary.

The respondent herein-Sandeep Kumar applied for the post of Head Constable (Ministerial) in 1999. In the application form it was printed :



"12(a) Have you ever been arrested, prosecuted kept under detention or bound down/fined, convicted by a court of law for any offence debarred/disqualified by any Public Service Commission from appearing at its examination/selection or debarred from any Examination, rusticated by any university or any other education authority/Institution."

Against that column the respondent wrote : 'No'.



It is alleged that this is a false statement made by the respondent because he and some of his family members were involved in a criminal case being FIR 362 under Section 325/34 IPC. This case was admittedly compromised on 18.01.1998 and the respondent and his family members were acquitted on 18.01.1998.

In response to the advertisement issued in January 1999 for filing up of certain posts of Head Constables (Ministerial), the respondent applied on 24.02.1999 but did not mention in his application form that he was involved in the aforesaid criminal case.

The respondent qualified in all the tests for selection to the post of temporary Head Constable (Ministerial). On 03.04.2001 he filled the attestation form wherein for the first time he disclosed that he had been involved in a criminal case with his tenant which, later on, had been compromised in 1998 and he had been acquitted.

On 02.08.2001 a show cause notice was issued to him asking the respondent to show cause why his candidature for the post should not be cancelled because he had concealed the fact of his involvement in the aforesaid criminal case and had made a wrong statement in his application form. The respondent submitted his reply on 17.08.2001 and an additional reply but the authorities were not satisfied with the same and on 29.05.2003 cancelled his candidature.

The respondent filed a petition before the Central Administrative Tribunal which was dismissed on 13.02.2004. Against that order the respondent filed a writ petition which has been allowed by the Delhi High Court and hence this appeal.

The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the respondent should have disclosed the fact of his involvement in the criminal case even if he had later been acquitted. Hence, it was submitted that his candidature was rightly cancelled.

We respectfully agree with the Delhi High Court that the cancellation of his candidature was illegal, but we wish to give our own opinion in the matter.

When the incident happened the respondent must have been about 20 years of age. At that age young people often commit indiscretions, and such indiscretions can often been condoned. After all, youth will be youth. They are not expected to behave in as mature a manner as older people. Hence, our approach should be to condone minor indiscretions made by young people rather than to brand them as criminals for the rest of their lives.

In this connection, we may refer to the character 'Jean Valjean' in Victor Hugo's novel 'Les Miserables', in which for committing a minor offence of stealing a loaf of bread for his hungry family Jean Valjean was branded as a thief for his whole life.

The modern approach should be to reform a person instead of branding him as a criminal all his life.

We may also here refer to the case of Welsh students mentioned by Lord Denning in his book 'Due Process of Law'. It appears that some students of Wales were very enthusiastic about the Welsh language and they were upset because the radio programmes were being broadcast in the English language and not in Welsh. Then came up to London and invaded the High Court. They were found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to prison for three months by the High Court Judge. They filed an appeal before the Court of Appeals. Allowing the appeal, Lord Denning observed :-



"I come now to Mr. Watkin Powell's third point. He says that the sentences were excessive. I do not think they were excessive, at the time they were given and in the circumstances then existing. Here was a deliberate interference with the course of justice in a case which was no concern of theirs. It was necessary for the judge to show - and to show to all students everywhere - that this kind of thing cannot be tolerated. Let students demonstrate, if they please, for the causes in which they believe. Let them make their protests as they will. But they must do it by lawful means and not by unlawful. If they strike at the course of justice in this land - and I speak both for England and Wales - they strike at the roots of society itself, and they bring down that which protects them. It is only by the maintenance of law and order that they are privileged to be students and to study and live in peace. So let them support the law and not strike it down.

But now what is to be done? The law has been vindicated by the sentences which the judge passed on Wednesday of last week. He has shown that law and order must be maintained, and will be maintained. But on this appeal, things are changed. These students here no longer defy the law. They have appealed to this court and shown respect for it. They have already served a week in prison. I do not think it necessary to keep them inside it any longer. These young people are no ordinary criminals. There is no violence, dishonesty or vice in them. On the contrary, there was much that we should applaud. They wish to do all they can to preserve the Welsh language. Well may they be proud of it. It is the language of the bards - of the poets and the singers - more melodious by far than our rough English tongue. On high authority, it should be equal in Wales with English. They have done wrong

- very wrong - in going to the extreme they did. But, that having been shown, I think we can, and should, show mercy on them. We should permit them to go back to their studies, to their parents and continue the good course which they have so wrongly disturbed."

[ Vide : Morris Vs. Crown Office, (1970) 2 Q.B.



114 ] In our opinion, we should display the same wisdom as displayed by Lord Denning.

As already observed above, youth often commit indiscretions, which are often condoned.

It is true that in the application form the respondent did not mention that he was involved in a criminal case under Section 325/34 IPC. Probably he did not mention this out of fear that if he did so he would automatically be disqualified.

At any event, it was not such a serious offence like murder, dacoity or rape, and hence a more lenient view should be taken in the matter.

For the reasons above given, this Appeal has no force and it is dismissed. No costs.



......................J.

(MARKANDEY KATJU) ......................J.

(GYAN SUDHA MISRA) NEW DELHI;

MARCH 17, 2011.
Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 04 April 2015
Thanks a lot Issac Gabriel sir..
I read the link u shared that was really helpful...but is this mean that my employer can raise question for the suppression of fact ??
And I too have to face the same writ, cases etc like that constable guy ?
Or will it be treated normal as I am acquitted from all charges now.
Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 04 April 2015
Thank you so much Prabhakar sir...
I Just hope they won't create any problem for me..as my case was different..it was just a road accident which only included me actually my bike..and I just had to face the case.
thank you so much for all your valuable suggestions..
it really helped a lot.
Isaac Gabriel (Expert) 04 April 2015
Welcome.All the best.Just remove the 'Anonymous' tag.You are fortunate enought to convince the experts with this tag.
prabhakar singh (Expert) 04 April 2015
@ Mr. Isaac Gabriel !

We should not press him for that as in the very query he has stated his name.
Guest (Expert) 04 April 2015
Dear Siddhartha,

Better don't show any anxiety about your omission in the form for the present. If the selectors/ concerned department seriously make deep scrutiny about the contents of the application/ admission form vis-a-vis the police report, only then try to seek solution to the exact problem, if any arise thereafter.
Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 04 April 2015
Thank u so much PS dhingra sir, Prabhakar singh sir and Issac gabriel sir..
God bless you all.
Guest (Expert) 04 April 2015
You are welcome.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Expert) 05 April 2015
You are under s misconception that deptt will do verification itself. They have to get the attestation form (containing questionnaire), as also mentioned in the judgement quoted by Mr Gabriel.


Further the judgement quoted by Mr Gabriel pertains to a case where the court directed lenient treatment to the candidate who omitted to give true details in the said questionnaire. You are yet to fill questionnaire.

SO you cannot be advised to deliberately give wrong information in the questionnaire and hope to get benefited from the said judgement of high court. Please note that as per Article 144 the Judgments of Supreme Court have force of law. High Court judgements are precedents only.

SO you are advised not to invite trouble hoping to have redemption.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 08 April 2015
The experts have addressed your query very well, hope this will guide you accordingly.


You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :