Conviction for an offence involving moral tarpitude is definitely taken into consideration by the authority competent to recruit. Whether a particular act is an offence involving a moral tarpitude is a question of legal interpretation. However, the offences of murder, rape, forgery, fraud, kidnapping, kidnapping a girl to marry, dealing in immoral traffic are few examples and all sever cases involving moral tarpitude would invite disqualification in public employment.
You have got to divulge this conviction with complete facts of the case before being interviewed, so that there may not arise any question of supression of conviction. It is no doubt a case of conviction, but the employer may consider the factor of severity.
But, if you either supress or make a false declaration, there are all probabilities that the employer may get the report and take suitabloe action including dismissal from service. The Delhi High Court relying on other judgments did not interfere with the case of false declaration despite the fact that the said Military servant was acquitted for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. (Recruit Pritam Singh vs. Union of India); The relevant para is reproduced:
"Thus a fact which was within the personal knowledge of the petitioner could not have been brought to the notice of the authorities, but for the above verification report by the concerned authorities. It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that if he had mentioned the factum of his previous conviction, he would not have been taken into the Force and particularly, in face of the fact that the petitioner has been subsequently acquitted, it has caused no prejudice to anyone. This argument cannot be accepted, primarily for the reason that the petitioner cannot be permitted to take advantage of his own falsehood and furthermore the proper course of action for the petitioner would have been to disclose the correct facts and subsequently inform the authorities concerned of his acquittal by the court of competent jurisdiction. There is no dispute to the fact that the petitioner was convicted and sentenced for an offence under Section 302 IPC vide judgment dated 19.4.1983 and 22.4.1983 while he had filled up the form in the year 1985. There can be no justification by the petitioner for making incorrect declaration in the Form."