The Patna High Court has set aside an order cancelling a Bihar Police constable's selection for concealing a criminal case registered when he was a juvenile. Justice Partha Sarthy held that the authorities must reconsider the matter in light of the candidate's age, the nature of the allegations and the outcome before the Juvenile Justice Board.
The Court directed the authorities to pass a fresh order within four months. It did not directly reinstate the candidate.
Background
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, applied for recruitment under the Bihar Police Constable Recruitment Advertisement No. 1 of 2023. After clearing the written and physical examinations, he joined Bihar Special Armed Police-6, Muzaffarpur, on June 1, 2025.
During verification, he answered negatively when asked whether he had been accused in a criminal case. Authorities subsequently discovered Manjhagarh Police Station Case No. 24 of 2016 and cancelled his selection through an order dated August 1, 2025.
Rahul Kumar argued that he was a juvenile when the incident allegedly occurred and that the Juvenile Justice Board, Gopalganj, disposed of the case on October 17, 2025, directing him to plant and maintain 40 trees for one month.
The State opposed the petition, arguing that the candidate had knowingly withheld information about the case.
The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Avtar Singh v. Union of India, which emphasised that not every omission warrants the same consequences.
The Supreme Court had observed:
“Suppression of ‘material’ information presupposes that what is suppressed that ‘matters’ not every technical or trivial matter. The employer has to act on due consideration of rules/instructions, if any, in exercise of powers in order to cancel candidature or for terminating the services of employee.”
Referring also to Ravindra Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the High Court stressed that decisions concerning concealment must be based on objective consideration of the relevant circumstances.
Justice Partha Sarthy noted that Rahul Kumar was among 85 accused persons in the case and had been declared a juvenile. The Court also considered the Juvenile Justice Board's observations about his background and conduct, along with the direction to plant trees.
The judgment further recognised the Supreme Court's emphasis on reforming young people rather than permanently branding them for youthful indiscretions.
Finding that the circumstances required reconsideration, the Court set aside the August 1, 2025 cancellation order and allowed the writ petition.
The respondents were directed to pass a fresh order within four months of receiving or being presented with a copy of the judgment.
Case Details
Case Title: Rahul Kumar v. State of Bihar & Ors.
Case Number: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3053 of 2026
Judge: Justice Partha Sarthy
Decision Date: October 13, 2026
