Early Times Report
Jammu, July 1: High court Chief Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar today said that a candidate to be recruited to police service must be worthy of confidence and must be a person of utmost rectitude and must have impeccable character and integrity.
"A person having criminal antecedents will not fit in this category. Even if he is acquitted or discharged, it cannot be presumed that he was completely exonerated. Persons who are likely to erode the credibility of the police ought not to enter the police force," he said in a petition filed by Ghulam Mohammad Shah, seeking quashment of his dismissal order passed vide March 18, 1993 government order No Misc. ISA/120-193 and for directing respondents to re-instate him with consequential benefits.
The petitioner, who was appointed as a constable in police department, served in DPL, Baramulla, up to 1987. He was transferred to Pulwama on February 13, 1987 and posted at Shopian police station. In March 1989, he was transferred to Awantipora police station and during this period, he joined militant ranks and exfiltrated to PoK where he received training in the handling of weapons to carry out subversive activities in India. Later, he returned to the valley and managed to join his duties again. On September 2, 1992, he was transferred to Ladakh as the department received adverse reports against him. He did not join there and went underground, following which he was dismissed from service on March 18, 1993.
He challenged his detention order in 2001 on the plea that he could not do so earlier because he was under detention from March 15, 1993 and was released in 2001.
The chief justice observed that keeping a person with doubtful integrity or having connections with militants in police force would have disastrous consequences. The respondents having lost confidence on the petitioner, having regard to credible materials, thought fit to dismiss the petitioner from police force by recording satisfaction. The said satisfaction recorded cannot be held erroneous to come to a different conclusion and apart from the above reason, the petitioner challenged the order of his dismissal only in 2001. Though delay is attempted to be explained in the affidavit, the whereabouts of the petitioner from 1993 to 2001 are not at all explained by him. On the contrary, during that period he remained underground, joined militant group, was involved in subversive activities and was also detained under PSA. These facts have not been disputed and are established. Therefore, no case is made out by the petitioner to challenge his March 18, 1993 dismissal order in 2001.
With these observations, the chief justice dismissed the petition. |
