The High Court by the said judgment allowed the writ and set-aside the order dated 23.11.2010 passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal (for short “Tribunal” ) and directed the appellant no.
– II/VR, dated 09.02.2009, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Intelligence Branch had informed that the respondent has supressed the fact of his involvement in a criminal case and as the case against the respondent is sub-judice, no opinion for his suitability could be given at this stage. It was said that, without his acquittal in the pending criminal case, direction to issue the letter of appointment cannot be recommended and observed that, in case the respondent is acquitted, his case may be considered by the appellant as per rules. Therefore, the High Court concurred with the finding of the Tribunal on the issue of suppression of material information and was of the opinion that because the respondent has not yet been held guilty in the criminal case by the competent Court, therefore, presumption of innocence in his favour still remains. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent referring to the details of column 12 of the verification roll, submits that the information sought was vague and considering the nature of the information asked, the respondent was not required to furnish the details of the pending criminal case.
The Tribunal and the High Court have appreciated the said issue and rightly recorded the finding that it is not a case of suppression of material information, and the High Court was right in directing the appellant to issue the letter of appointment subject to the decision in the pending criminal case.
After appreciating the evidence as brought on record, the Court found that the prosecution has hopelessly failed to bring home the guilt and prove the charges against the respondent. For analysing the sustainability of the said objection, the language used to ask information in Column No 12 of verification roll may be relevant and for ready reference, it is reproduced as under; “ Have you been arrested, detained or convicted by a court of any offence if the answer is ‘yes’ the full particulars of the Arrest or detention or conviction and sentence should be given. …
The State Government and the Tribunal appeared to have proceeded on the basis that the respondent ought to have indicated the fact of arrest or pendency of the case, though column 12 of the attestation form did not require such information being furnished.
In view of the discussion made herein above, the opinion given by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Intelligence Branch, and the stand taken by the Department before the Tribunal and the High Court regarding suppression of material information by the respondent cannot be countenanced. It is relevant to state here that on the issues relating to suppression of information and/or submitting false information and as to the question of having been arrested or regarding pendency of a criminal case and effect of conviction/acquittal in such criminal cases, there were conflicting opinions of Division Bench judgments of this Court. In view of aforesaid discussion, we summarize our conclusion thus: 38.1 Information given to the employer by a candidate as to conviction, acquittal or arrest, or pendency of a criminal case, whether before or after entering into service must be true and there should be no suppression or false mention of required information.
38.4
In case there is suppression or false information of involvement in a criminal case where conviction or acquittal had already been recorded before filling of the application/verification form and such fact later comes to knowledge of employer, any of the following recourse appropriate to the case may be adopted : – 38.4.1 In a case trivial in nature in which conviction had been recorded, such as shouting slogans at young age or for a petty offence which if disclosed would not have rendered an incumbent unfit for post in question, the employer may, in its discretion, ignore such suppression of fact or false information by condoning the lapse. 38.6
In case when fact has been truthfully declared in character verification form regarding pendency of a criminal case of trivial nature, employer, in facts and circumstances of the case, in its discretion may appoint the candidate subject to decision of such case. 38.10 For determining suppression or false information attestation/verification form has to be specific, not vague. Even in case where the information regarding pending criminal case is truthfully furnished and on acquittal therein, an employer has the discretion to consider the antecedents while issuing the letter of appointment. It is made further clear that in the event of issuance of the order of appointment, the respondent would only be entitled to notional benefits including continuity in service and pay fixation at par with other similarly situated persons and he would not be entitled for salary and back wages till the date of his appointment.
No order as to costs.
Case Title: THE STATE OF BENGAL Vs. MITUL KUMAR JANA
Case Number: C.A. No.-008510-008510 / 2011
