Deliberate suppression of criminal antecedents in attestation forms justifies cancellation of candidacy despite prior acquittal.

The applicant applied for the post of Constable (Executive) in the Delhi Police in 2016 and was provisionally selected after qualifying all stages.

On March 5, 2018, the applicant submitted an Attestation Form for character verification, wherein he categorically denied any involvement in a criminal case in Column 11(b).

A verification report from the SP, Alwar, subsequently revealed that the applicant had been involved in FIR No. 298/2014 under Sections 143, 323, and 452 of the IPC at PS Rajgarh, though he was acquitted on October 28, 2014.

Consequently, Respondent No. 2 issued a Show Cause Notice on July 9, 2018, proposing to cancel his candidature for deliberate concealment of material facts.

Despite the applicant’s reply and a personal hearing where he argued that disclosure was unnecessary due to his prior acquittal, the respondents cancelled his candidature via an order dated September 19, 2018.

Whether the action of the respondents in cancelling the candidature of the applicant on the ground of non-disclosure of his involvement in a criminal case, despite his acquittal, suffers from illegality, arbitrariness, or unreasonableness.

Truthful disclosure is a foundational requirement in public service and that deliberate concealment in the face of clear disclaimers demonstrates malafide intent.

State of U.P. & Anr. vs. Dinesh Kumar (2026)

The legal maxim "dura lex sed lex" (the law is harsh, but it is the law).

Principles from Avtar Singh v. Union of India and Ravindra Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) regarding the nature of non-disclosure and whether it reflects deliberate suppression.

The Tribunal found that the applicant’s declaration in the Attestation Form—stating "NAHI MUJH PAR KOI ABHIYOG DARJ NAHI HUA"—was factually incorrect and constituted a deliberate attempt to secure employment through deceit.

Applying the Dinesh Kumar precedent, the Tribunal reasoned that the obligation to disclose in the Attestation Form was absolute and not contingent upon the outcome of the criminal trial (acquittal).

The Tribunal emphasized that the high standards of integrity required for a disciplined force like the Delhi Police justify the employer’s decision to deem a candidate unsuitable for concealment.

The Tribunal observed that the respondents followed due process by issuing a Show Cause Notice and providing a personal hearing, thereby fulfilling the requirements of natural justice.

The Tribunal answered the core issue in the negative, finding no procedural or legal infirmity in the cancellation of the candidature.

The Original Application was dismissed as being devoid of merit, and no costs were awarded.