Past Record Can't Be Erased In Special Circumstances: Telangana High Court Upholds Denial Of Police Job Despite Acquittal As Juvenile
The Telangana High Court upheld the cancellation of a candidate's provisional selection as a police constable after the recruitment board considered his involvement, as a juvenile, in a case alleging the murder of his mother and an attack on his sister. The Juvenile Justice Board had acquitted him because the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.In doing so...
The Telangana High Court upheld the cancellation of a candidate's provisional selection as a police constable after the recruitment board considered his involvement, as a juvenile, in a case alleging the murder of his mother and an attack on his sister.
The Juvenile Justice Board had acquitted him because the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.
In doing so the court said that past record cannot be erased in "special circumstances".
Justice K. Sarath held that the police recruitment authority was entitled to assess his antecedents under the Telangana Police (Stipendiary Cadet Trainee) Rules. On the facts of the case, the Court declined to interfere with its decision that he was unsuitable for police service.
The Court observed referred to the fresh start principle under the Juvenile Justice Act under Section 3 (xiv) which states that All past records of any child under the juvenile justice system should be erased except in special circumstances.
“As per the above Section, in special circumstances, the principle of fresh start cannot apply. The petitioner was involved in a criminal case of murder of his mother and attempt to murder of his sister and the past records of the petitioner cannot be erased for appointment of the petitioner as Police Constable as special circumstances.”
The petitioner challenged two recruitment decisions. He was provisionally selected for a civil police constable post under a 2018 notification, but his selection was cancelled in 2021 after a medical board found a colour vision defect. He was again provisionally selected, this time for a Telangana State Special Police constable post under a 2022 notification. That selection was cancelled in 2025 following scrutiny of the juvenile case, which he had disclosed in his later attestation form.
Advocate Ramesh Chilla, for the petitioner argued that he had been acquitted as a juvenile and could not be denied employment on the basis of that case. He also disputed the earlier medical finding. Advocate C. Raja Shekar Reddy, for the recruitment board, submitted that the acquittal followed the failure of material witnesses to support the prosecution and that the board was entitled to assess the candidate's suitability for a disciplined force.
The High Court noted that the Juvenile Justice Board had acquitted Raju in 2012 after finding that the prosecution had not proved his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It nevertheless accepted the recruitment board's assessment of his antecedents under rules concerning character and moral turpitude. The Court held that the fresh start principle, which permits exceptions in special circumstances, did not require the board to disregard the case when assessing him for appointment as a police constable.
As to the 2018 selection, the Court found that Raju had not disclosed the criminal case in his earlier attestation form. It also noted his delay in challenging the 2021 cancellation on medical grounds. Finding no ground to interfere with either memorandum, the Court dismissed the writ petition.
Case Title: Kukkala Raju v. State of Telangana & Ors.
Case No.: W.P. No. 22550 of 2025
Date: August 31, 2026
Appearance: Ramesh Chilla for the petitioner; Assistant Government Pleader for Services (Home) for respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4; C. Raja Shekar Reddy for the recruitment board.