registration of criminal case/s against him in the relevant column of the Application Form. The Rule 13 of Rules of 1989 though allows convicts and ex-prisoners to be inducted in police service but does not cover the case of the respondent-writ petitioner, who had suppressed the material fact in respect to his criminal antecedents at the very inception of the recruitment process. Further, it is noticed that respondent-writ petitioner conveyed the fact regarding the pendency of criminal cases registered against him through representation dated 22.10.2018, after the result of written examination on realising that the non-disclosure of the same could act as an impediment to his appointment. In the considered opinion of this Court, concealment with regard to involvement in criminal case/s by the respondent-writ petitioner reflects that he was not honest in furnishing the required details sought by the employer. A candidate desirous of seeking employment in a disciplined police force is expected to carry high moral standards and the expected standard from such person is quite distinct from other services, therefore, any deliberate misstatement or omission in furnishing vital information is to be viewed seriously. In the present case, the respondent-writ petitioner has failed to meet the above standards and thus, his candidature has rightly been rejected by the appellantsrespondents. The impugned order dated 11.02.2019 passed by learned Single Bench is not in conformity with the Supreme Court judgments referred to supra and hence cannot be sustained.
