Acquittal on Benefit of Doubt Does Not Obliterate Employer's Right to Assess Suitability for Police Service

The petitioner qualified for the post of Police Constable in the 2013 recruitment process

During character verification, he disclosed that he had been prosecuted under Section 295 of the IPC for allegedly damaging a temple; however, he was acquitted on September 6, 2012, because prosecution witnesses turned hostile

In a previous round of litigation (W.P. No. 7515/2015), the High Court directed the respondents to reconsider his case in light of established precedents

On March 6, 2019, the Screening Committee again found the petitioner unsuitable, citing that the acquittal was not "honourable" and that the offense involved moral turpitude

The petitioner challenged this rejection seeking a Writ of Certiorari and Mandamus

1. Whether the acquittal of a candidate based on witnesses turning hostile constitutes an "honourable acquittal" entitling them to appointment in a disciplined force

2. Whether the employer/Screening Committee has the independent right to assess the suitability and moral character of a candidate despite a criminal acquittal

The Court applied Rule 6(3) of the M.P. Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961, and Regulation 64 of the M.P. Police Regulations, which require police officers to possess impeccable character and be free from bias

It relied on the landmark Supreme Court decision in Avtar Singh v. Union of India (2016), which established that even after acquittal in cases involving moral turpitude, the employer may consider all relevant facts as to antecedents to decide suitability

Further, the court applied principles from UT Chandigarh Admin v. Pradeep Kumar (2018) and Commr. of Police v. Mehar Singh (2013), holding that acquittal due to witnesses turning hostile is not an "honourable acquittal" and does not automatically entitle a person to a post in the police force

The Court reasoned that the Screening Committee conducted a thorough objective test as required by Avtar Singh, analyzing the nature and gravity of the offense under Section 295 IPC, which involves damaging religious sentiments and impacts public order

The Court observed that the petitioner’s acquittal was not on merits but occurred because witnesses were won over or turned hostile

Since the police force is a disciplined organization requiring the highest standards of integrity, the Committee was within its rights to conclude that the petitioner's involvement in a case of religious mischief rendered him unsuitable

The Court emphasized that judicial review is concerned with the decision-making process rather than the decision itself; here, the process was not flawed as the Committee assigned cogent reasons based on Government Instructions dated 24.07.2018

The findings of the Screening Committee were found to be neither arbitrary nor perverse; consequently, the High Court sustained the impugned order dated March 6, 2019, and dismissed the writ petition