Employee can be terminated for suppressing, giving false information on recruitment matters, SC observes

An employee can be terminated from service if they have suppressed or given false information, especially about matters impacting fitness or suitability for the post, according to a recent Supreme Court ruling. The top court further laid down principles of law to be factored in especially in recruitment for police forces, while adding their ability to inspire confidence in public is a bulwark of security.  

The top court's remarks came as it dismissed appeals of two Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel who suppressed material information and made false statement on queries about prosecution.

The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala noted that where an employee has made a truthful and correct declaration of a concluded criminal case, the employer will still have the rights to reconsider the antecedents of the candidate and can’t be forced to appoint the candidate. It said that a public employer needs to scrutinize each case thoroughly through its designated officials in case of recruitment for police forces.

The Supreme Court was quoted as saying by news agency PTI, ‘'The acquittal in a criminal case would not automatically entitle a candidate for appointment to the post. It would be still open to the employer to consider the antecedents and examine whether the candidate concerned is suitable and fit for appointment to the post'.'

The apex court went on to add that suppression of material information and making false statement on questions related to prosecution and conviction clearly showed the character, conduct and antecedents of an employee.  While the top court ruled against keeping information on matters related to prosecution, it also mentioned generalisations about youth, career prospects and age of candidates leading to offenders’ condemnation should not enter the judicial arena.

The bench further argued that the Court should do due diligence to ascertain whether the authority whose action is being challenged acted in a mala fide fashion or is there an element of bias in the authority’s decision. It also mentioned that whether procedure of inquiry adopted by the authority was fair and reasonable or not also needs to be probed.

A Constable (General Duty) was terminated from the CRPF after it was found that he hid the fact that a criminal case has been registered against him under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 147, 323, 324, 504 and 506.

(With agency inputs)

Also read: Supreme Court to live stream constitutional bench proceedings from Sept 27