Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Rajasthan High Court has recently ruled that employers are banned by law from referring to or taking into account a conviction verdict in order to deny employment to a successful candidate who was a child in conflict with the law at any point in time.

The division bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Yogendra Kumar Purohit was hearing an intra court writ appeal filed by the State, which was challenging an order issued by a single judge bench of the high court on February 2, 2022, in which one Bhawani Shankar Moorh-the respondent's candidature for the post of Police constable had been accepted and the State had been directed to appoint the petitioner with all attendant benefits.

The State had denied the respondent's candidature on the grounds that criminal charges were pending against him at the time when he was a minor under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act of 2000.

The respondent challenged the impugned notification on the grounds that he was entitled to a protective umbrella against the use of criminal antecedents in any future recruitment process under the mandate of Section 24 (Removal of disqualification on the findings of an offence) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Further, it was also contended that on the day when the impugned order was passed, the case was under trial and the respondent was not convicted for any offence.

The Single judge bench had opined that Section 24 of the Act of 2015 includes in its scope the cases of juveniles who have been convicted and protects such juveniles from any disqualification. As a result, a juvenile who is facing trial is on a better footing and would undoubtedly be entitled to the protective umbrella of Section 24 of the Act.

Sandeep Shah, the AAG along with Nishant Bafna argued before the division bench that the respondent had sought for the position of constable in the highly disciplined Police Force and that the department had unlimited power to reject the candidature of a person with a criminal past. They also argued that single bench was not justified in applying the provisions of Section 24 of the Act of 2015 because the criminal case against Bhawani Shankar Moorh was registered in 2011, and because the provisions of the Act of 2015 are not retrospective, the benefit of Section 24 of the Act of 2015 could not have been extended to protect the respondent against disqualification resulting from the pendency of a criminal case for the heinous offence of murder.

The division bench observed, “Any disqualification entailing from the conviction would have to be ignored and cannot act to the detriment of the child in conflict with law in any manner, which would include a selection process for public employment.”

Accordingly, the division bench upheld the judgment of single judge bench and hence the state's appeal was dismissed on lack of merits.

Cause Title – The State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Bhawani Shankar Moorh

Statute – Section 24 of Juvenile Protection Act of 2015