Non-Disclosure Of Minor Criminal Cases Leading To Acquittal Should Not Automatically Lead To Termination: Sikkim High Court

The High Court of Sikkim has set aside the termination of a constable employed in the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB), holding that suppression of minor criminal cases which ultimately resulted in acquittal should not automatically lead to termination from service.

The Court emphasized that authorities must evaluate the nature of the offence, the nature of the post, and the socio-economic background of the candidate before taking such drastic action.

Chief Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque stated that:“A person born into conditions of extreme poverty cannot always be expected to exhibit the same social behavior as one whose character has been shaped in a more advantageous environment.”

The Court further remarked that :“If this crime was disclosed in the application and verification form, it could not have any impact on antecedents of the Petitioner. None of this case would form part of material facts to dissuade a prospective employer giving petitioner employment in public service.”

The petitioner, Vikash belonged to a rural background in a district of Uttar Pradesh. He applied for the post of Constable (Washerman) in the SSB in 2020 under the Economically Weaker Section category and was selected for the position.

After his joining, he was asked to service probation period of 2 years, however within a few months of joining service, his employment was terminated on the ground that he had suppressed involvement in two crimes while submitting declaration in the recruitment form.

Examining the nature of the first criminal case, the court noted that the case was an FIR registered in 2017 under Sections 380 and 457 of the Indian Penal Code. In the official report it is stated that the complaint against the accused was false after investigation which was accepted by the Court.

Further the Second case was registered in 2020 under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC. The dispute was essentially personal in nature and was later amicably settled between the parties.

The Court remarked that even if the candidate had disclosed the crime in the application and verification form, it could not have any impact on candidates's eligibility for the post.

Further the Court stated that while suppression of facts must be taken seriously in disciplined forces, the nature of the duties associated with the post must also be considered.

Thus the Court set aside the termination order and concluded that “Every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future.”

Case Name: Vikash v/s Union of India & Ors.

Case No.: W.P. ( C) No.49 of 2025

Date of Decision: 09.03.2026

For the petitioner: Mr. A. Moulik, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ranjit Prasad, Ms. Laxmi Khawas and Ms. Neha Kumari Gupta, Advocates.

For the Respondents: Ms. Sangita Pradhan, Deputy Solicitor General of India with Ms. Sittal Balmiki and Mr. Amit Kumar Sharma, Advocates.

Click Here To Read/Download Order