Team  SoOLEGAL

Conviction of A Juvenile by JJ Board is not a disqualification for employment, Requirement of its Disclosure Violated His Privacy Article 21: Allahabad High Court

Team SoOLEGAL 15 May 2021 3:08pm

Conviction of A Juvenile by JJ Board is not a disqualification for employment, Requirement of its Disclosure Violated His Privacy Article 21: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court recently ruled that using a candidate's criminal conviction as a juvenile to shape an opinion about his suitability for appointment is arbitrary, unlawful, and unconstitutional under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. The Court has also held that requiring a candidate to reveal details of criminal prosecutions faced as a juvenile is a violation of the child's right to privacy and reputation guaranteed by Article 21.

Justice Ajay Bhanothas also observed that the conviction by a Juvenile Justice Board under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 of a juvenile is not a disqualification for employment.The statement was made in response to a petition challenging the Commandant of the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC), Etah's order dated September 3, 2020, in which the applicant was considered unsuitable for the position of Constable by the Competent Authority.By ignoring the fact that the applicant was prosecuted as a juvenile, the Authority was "lawfully misdirected." The impugned order was therefore claimed to be arbitrary, unconstitutional, and in violation of petitioner's constitutional rights under Article 14, 16, and 21.

Placing reliance on the judgment of Rajiv Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and another 2019(4) ADJ 316,held that Article 21 of the Indian Constitution enshrines a child's right to reputation as a fundamental right. The court also stated that the requirement to disclose details of criminal prosecutions faced as a juvenile is violative of the right to privacy and the right to reputation of a child guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.The candidate "can keep his silence or refuse to provide information about the criminal prosecution he faced as a juvenile," according to the Court, and his omission of such information would not be considered a false statement or malicious suppression of evidence.

The aforementioned proceedings are irrelevant in determining the petitioner's appointment. By forcing the complainant to report a criminal investigation he faced as a juvenile, I find that the respondents’ authorities have violated the statute." The Court decided in favour of the plaintiff.The Court held that the competent authority had made a legal error in finding the petitioner unsuitable for appointment, and that the impugned order was arbitrary and unconstitutional, and that it should be set aside.



Tagged: Allahabad High Court   Juvenile   JJ Board   Article 21   Indian Constitution   Justice Ajay Bhanot   Justice Board  
Did you find this write up useful? YES 0 NO 0
Featured Members view all

New Members view all

×

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

0

DAYS

0

HOURS

0

MINUTES

0

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.