Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:135756 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 27109 of 2018 Petitioner :- Krishana Murari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Atipriya Gautam,Dinesh Kumar Rawat,Jyoti Bhushan,Suneel Kumar Mishra,Umesh Prasad Singh,Vinod Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. 2. Petitioner who was a candidate against the post of Constable in Civil Police pursuant to the advertisement issued by the respondent in the year 2018 being Numbered PRPB-1(82)/2015 and successfully cleared the selection but his candidature came to be cancelled only on the ground that he concealed a material fact of his involvement in criminal case being case crime No. 24/2013 under Sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 504 and 506 IPC. 3. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that at the time petitioner came to be implicated in the criminal case, he was minor however, later on before he could furnish his declaratory affidavit as a consequence to the selection as police constable in the respondent establishment, he came to be acquitted by the judgment passed by the judicial Magistrate dated 25.08.2015 in Criminal Case No. 577 of 2015. It is submitted that the petitioner submitted his notary affidavit on 12.06.2018 and thus there was no occasion to disclose this fact that he was involved in a criminal case and that he was acquitted in the said case. According to Shri Vinod Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner the format 92 prescribed to file a declaratory affidavit only mentions about the criminal case in which candidate had been implicated and had been convicted so as to disclose the procedure and method of sentence to be undergone by such convict. 4. It is further submitted by Shri Mishra, that the controversy is no more res integra in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Shivam Maurya v. State of U.P. and others 2020 ADJ page No.6 (DB) which has been repeatedly followed by this Court in a number of writ petitions wherein police verification has been directed (Writ A No. 9460 of 2025, Gaurav Kumar Sc (Male) Category v. State of U.P. and 8 others). 5. He has also placed reliance upon a judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Writ A No. 2844 of 2018 decided on 31.01.2023 wherein vide paragraph 18 the Court has held thus: "18. It is also relevant to mention that after the service of the petitioner was terminated on 27.12.2006 and an FIR was lodged bearing Criminal Case No.259/2007 and this was in respect of the fact that the petitioner had not disclosed in his verification affidavit regarding Case No.409/1995, wherein the petitioner was acquitted on 18.11.2016. Hence, it is to be seen that on the date on which the verification affidavit was filed i.e. on 18.11.2006 there was no case pending nor in any case the petitioner was convicted nor any investigation was pending against the petitioner. " 6. Learned Standing Counsel though sought to contest the matter on the basis of pleadings raised in the counter affidavit but could not cite any judgment to the contrary, nor could demonstrate that the petitioner was still facing a criminal trial at the time of furnishing his declaratory affidavit. 7. In view of the above, he writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 20.11.2018 cancelling the candidature of the petitioner and his selection against the post of Constable pursuant to the advertisement of the year 2015 is hereby quashed. Petitioner’s position in the select list stands restored. 8. Petitioner shall also be accordingly offered appointment subject to further verification by the police. Appropriate order shall be passed in this regard by the authority within a period of one months from the production of certified copy of this order. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 Nadeem WRIA No. 27109 of 2018 2 Digitally signed by :- NADEEM AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad