The Allahabad High Court said that a complaint under Section 498A is by now reputed to be lodged against the entire family in order to pressurise them so that the husband patches up with the wife. If this kind of the complaints were accepted to exclude from public employment, the neighbour, who is named in an FIR lodged by a third person’s wife against her husband, would also be dis-entitled to public employment.
A Single Bench of Justice J.J. Munir heard the petition filed by Baba Singh.
Prima facie the petitioner, who is a selected candidate for the post of Assistant Boring Technician in the Department of Minor Irrigation, has had his selection cancelled and the cancellation confirmed by the order dated 16.02.2024 on ground that his elder brother and the elder brother’s wife did not get along together which led the elder brother’s wife’s father to lodge a criminal complaint against the petitioner’s elder brother and all his family members including the petitioner before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, under Section 498A, 323 I.P.C and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act.
Counsel for the petitioner points out that he has challenged the proceedings of the criminal complaint before the Court by means of Application Under Section 482 wherein the Court has issued notice and granted stay of further proceedings in the complaint case pending before the Magistrate.
The Court said that,
Prima facie, even if the proceedings had not been stayed, the entire law which empowers the employer to keep a man of criminal antecedent out of his establishment never intends to exclude candidates who may have become victims of prosecutions involving family matters by relatives.
A complaint under Section 498A is by now reputed to be lodged against the entire family in order to pressurize them so that the husband patches up with the wife on disadvantageous terms or whatever be the reason.
If offences of this kind are to be taken into consideration to judge a prospective candidate’s criminal antecedent much disservice shall be done to the cause of public employment. Many a good talent would be lost to such frivolous complaints or first information reports lodged at the instance of the wife not just against her husband but some of his relatives like a brother or a nephew. It is well known that in complaints of this kind even neighbors are indicted.
If this kind of the complaints were accepted to exclude from public employment the neighbor who is named in an FIR lodged by a third person’s wife against her husband would also be dis-entitled to public employment. That is never the intention of the law when the principles to exclude persons with criminal antecedents were evolved as important criteria to exclude undesirable elements from public service.
A character certificate too is not to be mechanically and blindly refused. The District Magistrate, who is also a citizen and a very junior officer working in the district, would certainly be alive to the social maladies leading to malicious complaints about cruelty and dowry demand implicating the entire family. He ought to have sensitively dealt with the matter and appropriately considered the petitioner’s claim for the issue of a character certificate, the Court further said.
“The District Magistrate, Mirzapur will show cause why despite the aforesaid background which the Court has noticed, he has not issued a character certificate in the petitioner’s favour.
The Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation, U.P, Lucknow will on the principles above mentioned show cause by his affidavit why the impugned order be not quashed and appropriate directions issued ordering the petitioner to be appointed.
The affidavits by the Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation, UP, Lucknow and the District Magistrate, Mirzapur shall be filed on or before 22.08.2024,” the order reads.
The Court has fixed the next hearing of the petition on 22.08.2024.