Tattoos Not Completely Barred In Armed Police Forces, But Must Conform To Prescribed Norms: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that there is no absolute prohibition on tattoos in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), but the candidates must ensure that such tattoos conform to prescribed standards regarding their content, location and size. [2026 LiveLaw (Del) 600]A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan made the observation while dismissing the petitions filed by two CRPF personnel challenging their disqualification from selection to the post of Assistant Commandant (GD) through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE), 2023.The petitioners were declared medically unfit during the Detailed Medical Examination as well as the Review Medical Examination on account of tattoos on their right forearm, which falls within the saluting arm category.They argued that the recruitment advertisement did not expressly prohibit tattoos. It was their case that they had continued in service without any impediment despite possessing the same tattoos and that after being declared unfit, they had undergone procedures to remove the tattoos and should thus be permitted to undergo another medical examination.On the other hand, the Central Government opposed the pleas and relied on revised medical guidelines governing recruitment in CAPFs and Assam Rifles. It was argued that under the existing norms, tattoos are permissible only at specific locations, including the inner aspect of the left forearm, being the non saluting limb, or the dorsum of the hands, subject to prescribed limits.While examining the relevant guidelines, the Court said:“The rules do not per se stipulate an embargo on having a tattoo. They only provide the permissible location, content and size of the tattoo.”However, while doing so, the Bench observed that the petitioners admittedly possessed tattoos on their right forearm, a location not permitted under the governing rules.It added that the Petitioners, being members of the Disciplinary Force, cannot be permitted to plead ignorance of revised medical guidelines, more particularly when they are seeking selection to the post of Assistant Commandant through LDCE.“Furthermore, the eligibility of the Petitioners is required to be examined on the last day of submitting the application. In exercise of powers of judicial review, the Court is not expected to provide an additional opportunity to the Petitioners. Consequently, subsequent removal of the tattoo would not cure the ineligibility suffered by the Petitioners,” the Court said. It added that the existence of tattoos which are not permissible as per the revised guidelines is not disputed by the Petitioners and thus, they were ineligible to be considered for promotion as Assistant Commandant through LDCE. The Court ruled that even if they have now had their tattoos removed, they can reap no benefit for the same and they may apply for the next examination. Title: ANKIT MAAN v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS and other connected matterCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 600Click here to read order

Tattoos Not Completely Barred In Armed Police Forces, But Must Conform To Prescribed Norms: Delhi High Court

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Thapliyal

Tattoos Not Completely Barred In Armed Police Forces, But Must Conform To Prescribed Norms: Delhi High Court

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers