Candidature for Police Recruitment Cannot Be Kept in Abeyance Solely Due to Pending Criminal Trial

The applicant, Vishal, applied for the post of Constable (Executive) Male in the Delhi Police Examination-2023.

During the verification process, it was revealed that he was named in FIR No. 523/2020 under Sections 307 (attempt to murder), 504, and 498A of the IPC, involving an alleged physical assault on his sister-in-law.

Following an evaluation by the Screening Committee under Standing Order No. HRD/12/2022, the respondents issued an order dated 04.12.2024, keeping the applicant’s candidature in abeyance pending the final outcome of the criminal trial.

The applicant challenged this order, seeking a direction to allow him to join the service.

1. Whether the respondents were justified in keeping the applicant's candidature in abeyance solely due to a pending criminal trial.

2. Whether the applicant is entitled to an offer of appointment subject to the outcome of the pending criminal proceedings.

The Tribunal primarily relied on the legal principles established by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Vikas Nagar v. Commissioner of Police & Ors., W.P.(C) 2342/2021.

This precedent establishes that a candidate's appointment to the police force should not be indefinitely stalled by a pending criminal trial, provided the appointment is made conditional upon the final judicial outcome of the case.

The Tribunal observed that the facts of the present case were identical to the circumstances in Vikas Nagar.

While the respondents argued that the Screening Committee had the authority to defer the candidature based on the gravity of the charges (including Section 307 IPC), the Tribunal determined that keeping the candidature in indefinite limbo ("abeyance") was not sustainable in light of existing judicial precedents.

The Tribunal emphasized that the applicant's right to employment could be balanced with the department's integrity by making the appointment subject to the stipulations and final verdict of the Trial Court.

It directed the respondents to issue an offer of appointment to the applicant within two months. The holding specifies that the appointment remains strictly subject to the outcome of the pending criminal case and shall be governed by the directions laid down in Vikas Nagar v. Commissioner of Police.