In a significant ruling, Justice J.J. Munir of the Allahabad High Court addressed the issue of barring candidates from public employment due to criminal records arising from family disputes. The case, Baba Singh vs. State of U.P. and Others (Writ – A No. 12055 of 2024), involves the cancellation of Baba Singh’s selection for the role of Assistant Boring Technician in the Department of Minor Irrigation.
The petitioner, represented by Adv. Chandan Sharma, had his selection for the Assistant Boring Technician position revoked by an order dated February 16, 2024. This cancellation was due to the involvement of the petitioner’s elder brother and sister-in-law in a marital dispute, which led to a criminal complaint being filed by the father-in-law under Section 498A (cruelty by husband or relatives), Section 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the elder brother and all family members, including the petitioner.
Baba Singh contested the criminal complaint by submitting an application under Section 482 No. 17829 of 2024 to the Allahabad High Court. The court issued a notice and granted a stay on the proceedings of the complaint before the Magistrate.
Legal Issues Involved:
The central legal issue in this case was whether a criminal complaint arising from a family dispute could legitimately be used as grounds to deny a candidate public employment. The court reviewed whether the rejection of a character certificate and the subsequent cancellation of employment were justified according to legal principles concerning criminal records in public employment.
Court’s Observations and Decision:
While issuing notices to the District Magistrate of Mirzapur and the Chief Engineer of Minor Irrigation, U.P., Lucknow, Justice Munir made significant observations regarding the misuse of Section 498A and its impact on public employment.
The court underscored that the law’s aim to exclude individuals with criminal records from public service does not extend to disqualifying candidates solely based on their involvement in family disputes. Justice Munir noted, “A complaint under Section 498A is often filed against an entire family to apply pressure… Considering such offenses in evaluating a candidate’s criminal history would severely compromise the fairness of public employment.”
The court also stressed that denying a character certificate should not be done mechanically or without thorough consideration of the circumstances. The District Magistrate was criticized for not addressing the issue with appropriate sensitivity and was directed to provide a valid reason for the refusal of the certificate. The court commented, “A character certificate should not be denied automatically or without careful consideration. The District Magistrate should have handled the matter with greater sensitivity.”
Also Read
The court has instructed the District Magistrate of Mirzapur and the Chief Engineer of Minor Irrigation, U.P., Lucknow, to submit their affidavits by August 22, 2024. These affidavits should detail why the contested order should not be reversed and why the petitioner’s appointment should not be approved. The next hearing is scheduled for August 22, 2024, and the order must be conveyed to the relevant officials by the Registrar (Compliance) within 24 hours.
