Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 83202 (ALL)

GOKUL CHAND v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/11312/2025 · 2025-08-06

Ajit Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:133855 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11312 of 2025 Petitioner :- Gokul Chand Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Aman Arya,Satyam Maurya Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 2. By means of present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner for joining pursuant to his selection as Constable in Civil Police. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not being permitted to join as Constable civil police due to one criminal case being Case Crime No. 747 of 2018 under Section 498A, 307, 323, 506 IPC Police Station Phara, district Mathura was pending against the petitioner. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid case charge under Section 498-A, 323 and 506 IPC has been framed against the petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner could not be denied his appointment on the principle laid down by the Supreme court in the matter of Avatar Singh v. Union of India, 2016 (8) SCC 471. 4. It is submitted that in identical set of facts, writ petition was filed by one Naveen Rajhansh being writ A No. 6543 of 2023, Naveen Rajhans, State of U.P and 5 Others, decided on 28.4.2023, who was selected in Civil Police, but was not being offered appointment only on account of pending criminal case. This Court considered this aspect of the matter in the light of judgment of Avtar Singh (supra) and allowed the writ petition by setting aside the order with further direction to process appointment of that petitioner. 5. Learned Standing Counsel does not dispute the legal proposition as discussed in the case of Naveen Rajhansh and also another judgment of the High Court in the case of Sonu Yadav v. State of U.P. and 5 Others, Writ A No. 4577 of 2019, decided on 8th January, 2021. 6. In view of above, this petition stands disposed of with direction to respondent to offer joining to the petitioner pursuant to order of appointment within a period of four weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. However, his appointment and joining will be subject to final outcome of criminal case. Order Date :- 7.8.2025 Nadeem WRIA No. 11312 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- NADEEM AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad