The Member Secretary vs P.Manikandan
- Court
- Madras High Court
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.09.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.DILIP KUMAR
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
and
CMP (MD) Nos.12317 of 2026, 15781 of 2023
and
11351 of 2024
1. The Member Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board,
Old Commissioner of Police Office Complex,
Pantheon Road,
Egmore,
Chennai – 600 008.
2. The Director General of Police,
Tamil Nadu Police,
Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Tamil Nadu Police South Zone,
Madurai. ... Appellants
Vs.
P.Manikandan ... Respondent
1/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
Prayer:This Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, against
the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No. 5421 of 2023 and WMP(MD).
No.5071 of 2023, dated 01.06.2023.
For Appellants : Mr.B.Saravanan, AAG III
assisted by Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff, SGP
For Respondent : Mr.M.Pozhilan
for M/s.C.Arulvadivel Associates
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by N.DILIP KUMAR.J. )
This writ appeal is filed against the order passed by the learned Single
Judge of this Court in W.P.(MD) No.5421 of 2023, dated 01.06.2023. The
parties are referred to as they stand in the writ petition.
2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this writ appeal are as
follows:
2.1. The Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board issued a
th
recruitment notification dated 08 March 2022, inviting eligible candidates to
apply for various posts, including that of Sub-Inspector of Police.
2/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
2.2. The writ petitioner was one of the participants. He appeared for
th
the written examination conducted on 25 June 2022 and was successful.
2.3. He was subsequently called for certificate verification, followed
by physical measurement tests, endurance tests, physical efficiency tests and
viva voce and was successful in all of them.
2.4. The candidature of the writ petitioner was, however, rejected on
the ground that he had suppressed his involvement in a criminal case in Crime
No.32 of 2022 registered on the file of Dhalavaipuram Police Station,
Virudhunagar District, while filing his application. This was put to challenge
before the writ Court. The writ Court allowed the writ petition, leading to the
filing of this writ appeal.
3. Heard Mr.B.Saravanan, learned Additional Advocate General,
appearing for the appellants and Mr.M.Pozhilan, learned counsel appearing for
the respondent.
3/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
4. The learned Additional Advocate General would strenuously
contend that Uniformed service is a disciplined force and the candidates
aspiring recruitment to the uniformed service should have a clean service record
and should not have been found to have suppressed any material fact.
5. According to the Learned AAG, in this case, the writ petitioner,
having been implicated in a criminal case in Crime No.32 of 2022 registered
nd
against him, suppressed to mention the same in his application dated 02 April
th
2022; and rather stated those details in his representation dated 27 February
2023, only after his name was deleted from the final report in Final Report No.
62 of 2022. It is the conduct of the writ petitioner in suppressing the pendency
of the criminal case that made the department to reject his candidature and the
interference of the writ Court against such conclusion of the department is,
therefore, incorrect. Accordingly, he prayed for allowing the writ appeal.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner would
rd
contend that though the FIR was registered on 03 March 2022, till the date
when the writ petitioner submitted his application for the post of Sub-Inspector
nd
of Police on 02 April 2022, he was not aware of the registration of a criminal
case, against him; later he learnt that the criminal case was filed by one
4/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
Chitradevi claiming that she was cheated by the brother of the writ petitioner,
who after promising to marry her and on that pretext, having had physical
relationship with her, later refused to marry her; and on omnibus allegations
against the writ petitioner and his parents, the criminal case was registered
against not only the brother of the writ petitioner, but also against his parents
and his siblings; the DSP of Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District/investigation
th
officer, upon completion of the investigation, filed a final report on 29 April
2022 in Final Report No.62/2022, exonerating the writ petitioner from the
charges and since he was staying at Chennai and preparing for his exams, he
had no knowledge about the registration of the criminal case against him; since
the writ petitioner never had any knowledge about the criminal case that was
registered against him in Crime No.32 of 2022 at the relevant point of time, his
non-mentioning of the same in his application, will not amount to suppression;
an individual can be accused of suppression, only of facts within his
knowledge; he submitted that the conclusion of the learned Judge that there is
no suppression of a material fact within the knowledge of the writ petitioner is
correct and he prayed for dismissal of the writ appeal.
7. We have perused the materials available on record and given our
anxious consideration to the respective submissions.
5/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
8. The only point that arises for consideration in this writ appeal is
whether the writ petitioner knowingly suppressed his implication in Crime No.
nd
32 of 2022 when he filed his application on 02 April 2022.
9. We have no difficulty in agreeing with the Learned AAG that the
standard expected of a person intended to serve in the Uniformed service is
different from the one of a person who intended to serve in other services; the
candidate seeking employment in the police force should be honest, trustworthy
and his integrity should be above board and he should be reliable; and that the
issue is not of eligibility of the writ petitioner, rather that of suppression of
material information that was required to be disclosed.
10. The three-judges bench of the Apex Court in the
judgment delivered in Avtar Singh v. Union of India and Others and
reported in (2016) 8 SCC 471 , has laid down the law to be followed in
these cases. The appointing authority shall take a decision only after
considering the seriousness of the crime. The relevant paragraphs are
reproduced hereinbelow:
“38. We have noticed various decisions and
tried to explain and reconcile them as far as possible.
6/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
In view of the aforesaid discussion, we summarise 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.
38.2. While passing order of termination of
services or cancellation of candidature for giving false
information, the employer may take notice of special
circumstances of the case, if any, while giving such
information.
38.3. The employer shall take into
consideration the government
orders/instructions/rules, applicable to the employee,
at the time of taking the decision.
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 recourses 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
7/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
discretion, ignore such suppression of fact or false
information by condoning the lapse.
38.4.2. Where conviction has been recorded
in case which is not trivial in nature, employer may
cancel candidature or terminate services of the
employee.
38.4.3. If acquittal had already been
recorded in a case involving moral turpitude or
offence of heinous/serious nature, on technical ground
and it is not a case of clean acquittal, or benefit of
reasonable doubt has been given, the employer may
consider all relevant facts available as to antecedents,
and may take appropriate decision as to the
continuance of the employee.
38.5. In a case where the employee has
made declaration truthfully of a concluded criminal
case, the employer still has the right to consider
antecedents, and cannot be compelled to appoint the
candidate.
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.
38.7. In a case of deliberate suppression of
fact with respect to multiple pending cases such false
information by itself will assume significance and an
8/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
employer may pass appropriate order cancelling
candidature or terminating services as appointment of
a person against whom multiple criminal cases were
pending may not be proper.
38.8. If criminal case was pending but not
known to the candidate at the time of filling the
form, still it may have adverse impact and the
appointing authority would take decision after
considering the seriousness of the crime .
38.9. In case the employee is confirmed in
service, holding departmental enquiry would be
necessary before passing order of termination/removal
or dismissal on the ground of suppression or
submitting false information in verification form.
38.10. For determining suppression or false
information attestation/verification form has to be
specific, not vague. Only such information which was
required to be specifically mentioned has to be
disclosed. If information not asked for but is relevant
comes to knowledge of the employer the same can be
considered in an objective manner while addressing
the question of fitness. However, in such cases action
cannot be taken on basis of suppression or submitting
false information as to a fact which was not even
asked for.
38.11. Before a person is held guilty of
suppressio veri or suggestio falsi, knowledge
of the fact must be attributable to him .”
( emphasis supplied )
9/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
11. In this case, the department had not considered the seriousness of
the case. In this case, the department had not rejected the candidature of the writ
petitioner because of the seriousness of the case involved. Rather, the
department had rejected his candidature on the sole premise that the writ
petitioner had suppressed the pendency of a criminal case.
12. The department was conscious that the implication of the writ
petitioner in the criminal case was found to be false by the investigating agency
and a final report was filed, exonerating and deleting the name of the writ
petitioner from the array of accused and only his brother was implicated in the
final report.
13. The learned Single Judge had rightly arrived at a conclusion that
no material is available to hold that the writ petitioner knowingly suppressed his
implication in the criminal case. The department had failed to establish that the
writ petitioner had knowledge from the attendant circumstances that he was
implicated in the criminal case.
10/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
14. In the recent judgment in Shatrughn Yadav v. Fertilizers and
th
Chemicals Travancore Ltd. (F.A.C.T.) and others , dated 11 August 2026,
reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1537 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as
follows:
“9. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
High Court has erred in not appreciating the facts and circumstances
of the case. He places reliance on the judgments in Ravindra Kumar
v. State of UP1 and Avtar Singh v. Union of India to contend that the
question to be examined is not whether there is non-disclosure
simplicitor, but whether there was deliberate suppression or supply of
false information on the part of the candidate. Each case has to be
examined on its own merits and termination cannot be an automatic
consequence of existence of criminal antecedents.
10. It is submitted that such an exercise has not been
undertaken in the appellant's case. The appellant's consistent stand
has been that he had no knowledge of the existence of the NCR,
therefore his declaration was bona fide.
19. Now coming to the merits of the case, the issue to be
considered by us is whether the action of the respondents in
terminating the employment of the appellant, in the given facts and
11/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
circumstances, was permissible in law.
20. The legal position on the issue of suppression of
information in verification forms with regard to criminal antecedents
has been settled and summarised in a three-Judge Bench decision of
this Court in Avtar Singh (supra).
21. What emerges from the above is that the relevant facts
and circumstances must be considered in each case. The order of
termination must not be mechanical but must have regard to the form
of suppression, the outcome of the criminal case, the nature of the
employment and of the offence, and any special circumstances.
Termination is therefore not an automatic consequence of the
disclosure of criminal antecedents; rather, the specific case of the
employee must be considered, and the employer must apply its mind
before arriving at a decision.
22. In a recent decision of this Court in Ravindra Kumar
(supra) involving non-disclosure of a criminal case in the verification
form, this Court granted relief to the appellant therein, having regard
to the fact that on the date of the application, no criminal case was
pending as he had been acquitted. Due regard was also given to the
character certificate by the SHO certifying that the candidate was
excellent, and that the appellant's general reputation was good. This
Court also noted that the selection had been mechanically treated as
12/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
irregular merely because the affidavit contained incorrect facts,
instead of considering the appellant's suitability for appointment,
which was an impermissible approach.
23. Similarly, in Umesh Chandra Yadav v. Inspector
General and Chief Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force,
Northern Railway, New Delhi, where the appellant had failed to
furnish information regarding a criminal case wherein he had been
discharged as a juvenile, this Court, while granting relief, noted that
in the facts and circumstances, such action could not be considered
suppression of material information. It was reiterated that
termination must not be done arbitrarily and the yardstick to be
applied depends on the nature of the post, the impact of suppression
and suitability. The relevant paragraph is reproduced hereinbelow:
“14. This cannot be disputed that the
candidate who intend to participate in the selection
process is required to furnish correct information
relating to his character and antecedents in the
verification/attestation form before or after his
induction into service. At the same time, it is also true
that the person who has suppressed the material
information, cannot claim unfettered right of seeking
appointment or continuity in service but, at the same
time, he has a right not to be dealt with arbitrarily
and power has to be exercised in reasonable manner
with objectivity having due regard to the facts of the
13/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
case on hand. The yardstick which has to be applied
always depends upon the nature of post, nature of
duties, impact of suppression on suitability has to be
considered by the competent authority considering
post/nature of duties/services and power has to be
exercised on due diligence of various aspects at the
given time and no hard-and-fast rule of thumb can be
laid down in this regard.”
24. To summarise, the enquiry to be undertaken by the
employer, before proceeding to terminate the services of an employee
on the ground of suppression of information regarding criminal
antecedents, is essentially two-pronged. The first is one of fact:
whether there has, in truth, been any suppression or furnishing of
false information by the candidate, having regard to the extent of his
knowledge at the relevant time and the circumstances in which the
declaration came to be made. The second prong of enquiry requires
the authorities to apply their mind to the specific facts and
circumstances of the case including the type of the suppression, the
nature of allegations, role and gravity of the offence, the nature of the
post and the duties attached to it and wherever relevant the effect
thereof, and the eventual outcome of the criminal proceedings, if
concluded, in order to arrive at a considered conclusion as to
whether the continuation of the employee in service would not be
feasible and the only option available is termination from service. It
14/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
is only where both these stages of enquiries are undertaken and not
otherwise, that an order of termination on this ground can be said to
be sustainable in law.”
15. In the present case, the question whether there has been, in truth,
any suppression or furnishing of false information by the petitioner, having
regard to the extent of his knowledge at the relevant time, is to be considered.
No material is brought by the State to show that there was deliberate
suppression on the part of the petitioner. If the petitioner was not shown to have
knowledge of the registration of a criminal case in Crime No.32 of 2022 against
nd
him on the date when he filed his application on 02 April 2022, there is no
justification on the part of the department to reject his candidature. Such an
inquiry has not been undertaken by the department. Rather, they have blindly
concluded that the petitioner was involved in a criminal case in Crime No.32 of
rd
2022 dated 03 March 2022 and therefore, he had suppressed the pendency of
the criminal case. Therefore, they concluded that he had suppressed the criminal
case and his past conduct and character is found to be not satisfactory. This
conclusion of the authority is quite contrary to the manner of inquiry directed to
be undertaken by the Apex Court in the judgments mentioned supra.
15/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
16. The present case also brings into sharp focus a larger issue
concerning the future and livelihood of the younger generation. A criminal case
may commence with the registration of an FIR on the basis of an allegation, but
the registration of an FIR by itself cannot be treated as proof of guilt or as a
conclusive determination of the character and suitability of the person against
whom such allegation is made. In many cases, particularly where the allegations
are subsequently found to be false, exaggerated, motivated or unsupported by
the materials collected during investigation, the accused may ultimately be
exonerated, discharged or acquitted. This case itself demonstrates such a
situation, where the investigating agency, upon completion of the investigation,
found that the petitioner was not involved and deleted his name from the array
of accused.
17. A serious concern arises when an FIR remains pending for an
unduly long period without completion of investigation or when the filing of the
final report/charge sheet is unnecessarily delayed. During such period, the
person concerned continues to carry the burden of a "pending criminal case",
notwithstanding the fact that the allegation has not culminated in a finding of
guilt. For a young person who is at the threshold of his career, such pendency
16/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
can have consequences far beyond the criminal proceeding itself. Recruitment
notifications, character verification and employment procedures, even in the
private sector, may treat the mere pendency of a criminal case as an impediment,
thereby preventing a young person from securing employment at the very stage
of life when he is seeking to establish himself and support his family.
18. The effect can be particularly harsh in cases involving public
employment, including recruitment to uniformed services. A youth may
successfully undergo a highly competitive selection process, clear written
examinations, physical tests, endurance tests and interviews, and yet lose the
opportunity of appointment merely because an FIR happens to remain pending
against him, even without his knowledge, as in the present case. In such
circumstances, if the criminal case is subsequently closed, the accused is
exonerated, or the allegations are found to be false, the lost period of
employment and the opportunity to enter public service cannot always be
restored. The present judgment itself recognises that the life and career of a
youth who has successfully undergone a difficult selection process should not
be laid to waste on account of circumstances which do not establish his
culpability.
17/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
19. The objective should not be merely to determine whether a person
is technically involved in a pending criminal case, but to ensure that a young
citizen who has not been found guilty is given a fair opportunity to build his life
and participate meaningfully in society. The law must protect the legitimate
interests of public administration while simultaneously preventing the criminal
process, particularly a prolonged or ultimately unfounded criminal proceeding,
from becoming an instrument that permanently destroys the career, livelihood
and future prospects of the youth.
20. The life of a youth like the writ petitioner, who aspire to be
recruited to the uniformed service and who was successful in all these difficult
physical and written tests, cannot be laid to waste because of his brother’s love
story, that turned ugly at a later stage.
21. The learned Single Judge has rightly arrived at a conclusion that
there was no suppression of any material fact by the writ petitioner. The
department has no material to make us to draw any other conclusion, than to
concur with the reasoned order of the Learned Single Judge that the writ
petitioner is not guilty of suppression of material fact.
18/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
22. For the foregoing reasons, we are not inclined to interfere with the
order passed by the learned Single Judge. In the result, the writ appeal stands
dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
[M.D.I.,J] [N.D.K.,J]
03.09.2026
Index:Yes
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation: Yes
PKN
To
1. The Member Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board,
Old Commissioner of Police Office Complex,
Pantheon Road, Egmore,
Chennai – 600 008.
2. The Director General of Police,
Tamil Nadu Police,
Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai,
Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004.
3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Tamil Nadu Police South Zone,
Madurai.
19/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
AND
N.DILIP KUMAR, J.
PKN
W.A(MD)No.2011 of 2023
03.09.2026
20/20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2026 03:28:40 pm )