Madras HC says FIR alone no proof of guilt, upholds police aspirant’s appointment

CHENNAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed the State government's appeal against a single-judge order that turned down a bar on a youth from police recruitment based on a later quashed FIR.

“The life of a youth cannot be laid to waste because of his brother’s love story, that turned ugly at a later stage,” the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court observed while dismissing an appeal filed by the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board (TNUSRB) against a single judge’s order in favour of a police aspirant.

The Division Bench of Justices M Dhandapani and N Dileep Kumar held that no material established that the petitioner, P Manikandan, knowingly suppressed his involvement in a criminal case while applying for recruitment as a sub-inspector of police.

“The present case also brings into sharp focus a larger issue concerning the future and livelihood of the younger generation. A criminal case may commence with the registration of an FIR on the basis of an allegation, but the registration of an FIR by itself cannot be treated as proof of guilt or as a conclusive determination of the character and suitability of the person against whom such allegation is made,” the judges observed.

Upon completing the investigation, the local police station found that the petitioner was not involved and deleted his name from the array of accused. But the delay cost the youth a polic job.

The TNUSRB issued a notification on March 8, 2022, for recruitment to various posts, including that of sub-inspector of police. Manikandan cleared the written examination, certificate verification, physical measurement test, endurance test, physical efficiency test and viva voce.

But his candidature was rejected after the department alleged that he had suppressed his involvement in a criminal case, crime no. 32 of 2022, registered at Dhalavaipuram police station in Virudhunagar district.

However, the DSP of Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar district, after completing the investigation, filed a final report on April 29, 2022, exonerating Manikandan from the charges, and since he was staying in Chennai and preparing for his exams, he had no knowledge about the registration of the criminal case against him, the court noted.

The judges further observed that the objective should not merely be to determine whether a person was technically involved in a pending criminal case, but to ensure that a young citizen who had not been found guilty was given a fair opportunity to build his life and participate meaningfully in society.

The law must protect the legitimate interests of public administration while preventing the criminal process, particularly a prolonged or ultimately unfounded criminal proceeding, from becoming an instrument that permanently destroys the career, livelihood and future prospects of the youth, the court said.