A teen patti gambling case is pending against me,can i join gujarat government job.
kapadiya nilesh
(Querist) 18 March 2013
This query is : Resolved
Dear sir
One case of bomaby gambling act section no. 12 is pending against me, and I passed a government job.
When I was arrested I got a bail within 2 hours and now case is pending in a court.
My question is
1. If I selected in government job, will police station give me character certificate or not, and if they will give, they mention about this pending case in report.
2. If I would be convicted by court what is punishment regarding this section.and conviction will affect to any government job in future.
3.if I get character certificate of mentioning this pending case , could I join government job or not?
4. This offence is civil offence or criminal offence?
5. If I do not reveal this fact to government what would be happened?
6. Is this moral turpitude offence or not?
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 18 March 2013
Before I answer any of your questions, I would like to know have you disclosed the pendency of this case in your application?
kapadiya nilesh
(Querist) 18 March 2013
This case was registered after interview of government job.and now order of appointment will be come in 2 to 3 months.
So there is no question to mention about this case in job application form.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 18 March 2013
The offence does not involve the matter touching moral turpitude. the govt would ignore the issue.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 18 March 2013
1.yes!police shall give report about you with pendency of this case too.
2.Conviction if made would affect your job prospect.
3.As you have not been convicted,just now it may not.
4.It's a criminal offence.
5.It would prove more dangerous as and when subsequently revealed.
6.The expression 'moral turpitude' is not defined anywhere but it means anything done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good morals. It implies depravity and weakness of character and disposition of the person charged with the particular conduct. Every false statement made by a person may not be 'moral turpitude' but it would be so it it discloses vileness or depravity in the doing of any private and social duty which a person owes to his fellowmen or to his society in general.
In Shiva Nand v. Sub Divisional Officer, Chunar, 1961 RD (HC) 186, the question which arose was whether a conviction under Section 13 of the Public Gambling Act was a conviction for an offence involving moral turpitude. There was a difference of opinion between Mootham C. J. and Dayal J. on that question and reference was made to Mr. Justice Mukerji. He answered the question in the affirmative and after referring to the dictionary meaning of the word 'moral turpitude' he laid down:
"The meaning given to the phrase 'moral turpitude' by Bovier which I have quoted above, indicated that 'moral turpitude' and turpitude mean almost the same type or failing in a man's character, or portray the same type of baseness in a man's moral and mental make up."
He went on to say:
He went on to say:
"Ideas of morals often undergo changes in different periods of a country's history. It is also true that different people of the world some times differ as to whether a particular act is moral or immoral. Whenever a question has to be considered as to whether a certain act is moral or immoral one has to consider as to how that act is viewed by the society or the community, as the case may be, and if the society or the community views such act as involving moral turpitude, then even though some particular individual may not consider it so will not make the act a moral one, or a praiseworthy act. Therefore, whether an act involves moral turpitude or does not, has to be determined not necessarily on abstract notions of the rights and wrongs involved or the harm or the good coming out or the act but how that act is looked upon in the society where the act has been committed."
The learned Judge further observed:
"The phrase 'moral turpitude' refers to acts of baseness; acts which have an element of vileness or acts which are harmful to society in general or contrary to accepted rules of rights and duties between man and man. It may be that some acts involve moral culpability in a larger degree than other acts but, nevertheless, all such acts do involve moral culpability."
But in Mangali vs Chhakki Lal And Ors. AIR 1963 All 527, 1963 CriLJ 489 Allahabad High Court,A.P. Srivastava, J. LAID:
"5. With great respect, it appears to me that some or the observations made in these decisions have been too widely stated and if followed literally may make every act punishable in law an offence involving moral turpitude, that, however could not be the intention with which those observations were made. From consideration of the dictionary meaning of the words 'moral' and 'turpitude' as well as the real ratio decidendi of the cases the principle which emerges appear to be that the question whether a certain offence involves moral turpitude or not will necessarily depend on the circumstances in which the offence is committed. It is not every punishable act that can be considered to be an offence involving moral turpitude. Had that been so, the qualification "involving moral turpitude" would not nave been used by the Legislature and it would have disqualified every person who had been convicted of any offence, the tests which should ordinarily be applied for judging whether a certain offence does or does not involve moral turpitude appear to be: (1) whether the act leading to a conviction was such as could shock the moral conscience or society in general, (2) whether the motive which led to the act was a base one and (3) whether on account of the act having been committed the perpetrator could be considered to be of a depraved character or a person who was to be looked down upon by the society.
6. No absolute standard can be laid down for deciding whether a particular act is to be considered one involving moral turpitude but the above are the general tests which should be applied and which should in most cases be sufficient for enabling one to arrive at a correct conclusion on the question."
kapadiya nilesh
(Querist) 18 March 2013
What is provision of punishment under this act?
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 19 March 2013
1. If I selected in government job, will police station give me character certificate or not, and if they will give, they mention about this pending case in report.
Ans : Practically No.
3.if I get character certificate of mentioning this pending case , could I join government job or not?
Ans : Most likely not.
4. This offence is civil offence or criminal offence?
Ans : Criminal
5. If I do not reveal this fact to government what would be happened?
Ansa : Arny time dujring service you can be thrown out for suppresssion of facts.
6. Is this moral turpitude offence or not?
Ans : Gambling . Why no moral turpitude is there.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 19 March 2013
Q.What is provision of punishment under this act?
A.a fine of 200 rupees or imprisonment of up to 3 months. Additionally, this Act prohibits visiting gambling houses. A fine of Rs 100 or imprisonment of up to one month is the penalty
