DGP cannot be compelled to reinstate person in police force on acquittal in criminal case: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday reiterated that a person's acquittal in a criminal case does not entitle them to reinstatement in service. [Imtiyaz Ahmad Malla v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and Others].A Division Bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela M Trivedi agreed with the view of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court that the Director General of Police (DGP) was the best judge to determine the suitability of a candidate for induction into the police force..The Court was hearing an appeal against a Jammu & Kashmir High Court judgment which had affirmed the order passed by the Director General of Police (DGP) declaring the appellant unsuitable for the post of constable, in view of his criminal background.The appellant was appointed as a constable in the Jammu & Kashmir Executive Police in August 2009. However, in March 2020, his appointment order was cancelled on the ground that he was involved in a criminal case for which he was arrested for four days. It was also found that he had concealed this information from the appointing authority.Challenging the said order, the appellant moved the High Court. Meanwhile, he was acquitted from the criminal case. Taking note of the same, the High Court directed the appointing authority to reconsider its decision to reject the appointment of the appellant.The DGP, however, rejected the appointment of the appellant in view of his criminal background, and found him unsuitable for the post of constable in the disciplined force.The appellant once again approached the High Court against this decision. The High Court refused to grant relief to the appellant on the ground that the decision of the DGP, who is the highest functionary in the hierarchy of the police department, could not be called into question.Aggrieved by this order, the appellant moved the present appeal before the apex court..The short issue for consideration before the Court was whether the DGP could be compelled to reinstate the appellant on his acquittal in the criminal case..The appellant argued that in the criminal trial against him, the prosecution had failed to examine the investigating officer and also failed to bring home the charges levelled against him. Thus, his acquittal in the said case was required to be treated as an honourable acquittal.Moreover, it was submitted that the very basis for presuming that the appellant had a criminal background held no ground, on his having been acquitted by the competent criminal court..In its analysis, the top court relied on its decision in Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration And Others v. Pradeep Kumar And Another (2018), wherein it was observed that the acquittal in a criminal case is not conclusive of the suitability of a candidate for a post. Further, if a person is acquitted or discharged, it cannot always be inferred that he was falsely involved or that he had no criminal antecedents.Considering the above precedent, the Court upheld the High Court judgment and said,"The High Court in the impugned judgement has also elaborately dealt with each and every aspect of the issues involved, while upholding the order of the Single Bench to the effect that the Director General being the highest functionary in the police hierarchy, was the best judge to consider the suitability of the petitioner for induction into the police force. The impugned order being just and proper, we are not inclined to interfere with the same in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.".[Read Judgment]