Supreme Court Asks MP HC To Relook Case Of Judge Aspirant Whose Selection Was Cancelled Over 'False' Dog Bite Case

The Supreme Court recently asked the Madhya Pradesh High Court to have a relook the case of a judicial aspirant, whose name was deleted from the merit list of the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services Examination, 2019 (Examination) due to a "false" criminal complaint. The petitioner stated that High Court did not take into account her acquittal from the criminal case.

A Division Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia in its order made a prima facie observation that the matter needs a re-look by the High Court on the administrative side.

In present case, the petitioner was selected to be posted as a civil judge (junior division) only to find out that her name has been deleted from the merit list/selection list on the ground of a previous criminal case. Pertinently, petitioner was acquitted in the said case. In this context, she asserted in her plea:

“Material irregularity has been committed in passing the order whereby the name of the petitioner has been deleted from the list of selected candidates of civil judge without giving any reasonable opportunity of hearing on the basis of mere registration of matter registered against her under Section 289 of IPC (biting by street dog) in which she has been acquitted on merits by the JMFC court".

As per the complainant, petitioner made her pet dog bite the complainant and thereby omitted to take actions which are sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life, or any probable danger of grievous hurt.

However, petitioner has contended in her plea that the FIR filed against her was false and malicious.

“The petitioner was not directly involved in the crime but was a mere victim who got injured while saving the street dog from beating by the complainant. Also, from the medical report of the complainant, it has been proved that he was not bitten by any dog as such. The FIR was completely false and malicious hence the JMFC court Bhopal was pleased to acquit the petitioner on merit.”

The petitioner also averred that she had mentioned the case and her acquittal at all stages of the judicial services examination i.e., prelims, mains and interview.

Petitioner’s stance is that denial of appointment to her on the ground of previous criminal case in which she stands acquitted is violation of the fundamental right as prescribed under Article 14 of the Constitution, as she has not been treated equally and at par with other candidates. 

The petitioner was represented by Mr. S.K. Gangele, Sr. Adv and, Mr. Namit Saxena, AOR.

The petition was considered along with three connected writ petitions filed by similarly situated aspirants, whose selections were also cancelled on account of pending criminal cases.

"In the meantime, looking to the reason for not inducting the petitioners after they were selected, prima facie,prima facie, the matter needs a re-look by the High Court on the administrative side failing which, we will hear the matter on merits and pass necessary orders", the Court ordered while posting all the matters to October 17, 2023. 

Case Title: APOORVA PATHAK v. THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR, Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 379/2023 and connected cases.

Click here to read the order