Disqualification For Public Employment Is Removed When Offender Is Released On Probation: Delhi HC

Background Facts

The respondent was convicted under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC in a case filed by his wife. He filed an appeal against conviction. However, the marriage was dissolved by mutual consent during the pendency of the appeal. The Appellate Court upheld the conviction but released the respondent on probation of good conduct under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

Later an advertisement was issued by the Airports Authority of India (AAI) for recruitment for appointment against Junior Executive (Common Cadre) post. The respondent made his application and was found successful. After being selected by AAI, the candidate disclosed his past conviction and probation in the attestation form.

Subsequently, his appointment was cancelled by the AAI. It was cited that the candidate was ineligible as he was convicted of offences involving moral turpitude. The candidate challenged this cancellation before the Delhi High Court. The Single Judge allowed his petition directing AAI to appoint him. It was held that the disqualification attached to his conviction was removed by Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act. Aggrieved by this direction, AAI filed the Letters Patent Appeal before the Division Bench.

It was contended by the AAI that a person convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude is ineligible for appointment. The candidate was later released on probation but it did not erase his conviction. Further, the employer has discretion to verify a candidate's antecedents and assess their suitability and it is not nullified by Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act.

On the other hand it was contended by the candidate that Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, provides that a person dealt with under its provisions “shall not suffer disqualification” attaching to a conviction. It was contended that the disqualification was attached to the conviction. Further, the conviction was followed by release on probation. Therefore, Section 12 removes that disqualification for the purpose of appointment.

Findings of the Court

It was noted by the Court that Regulation 6(7)(b) of AAI's service regulations deems a person convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude as ineligible for appointment.

The Supreme Court's decision in Shankar Dass v. Union of India was relied upon wherein it was observed that the word 'disqualification' in Section 12 of the 1958 Act is used in the context of statutes that bar a convicted person from certain rights or offices, like the disqualifications for legislative membership under the Representation of the People Act.

It was held that dismissal from an existing job as a penalty is not a disqualification, but a bar to fresh appointment flowing from a conviction is a disqualification.

It was held by the Division Bench that the candidate's ineligibility under AAI's regulation stemmed from his conviction, and since he was released on probation, therefore, Section 12 was applied. Consequently, the disqualification attaching to the conviction stood removed. It was further clarified that it did not mean the conviction was erased, but that the consequential bar to employment was removed.

Furthermore, it was noted by the Division Bench that the offence arose from a matrimonial dispute which was later amicably settled and the marriage was dissolved by mutual consent. Further the complainant-wife had no objection.

Hence, the Single Judge's order was upheld by the Division Bench. The direction to appoint the candidate to the post of Junior Executive was also upheld. Consequently, the appeal filed by the AAI was dismissed by the Division Bench.

Case Name : Union of India & Ors. vs. Rajesh

Case No. : LPA 10/2026

Counsel for the Appellant : Anjana Gosain, Akansha Choudhary and Shreya Manjari, Advs.

Counsel for the Respondent : N.L Bareja and Saqib, Advs