MADURAI: Observing that the right to protest is a fundamental right, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court recently quashed an order passed by the Tenkasi Superintendent of Police rejecting the selection of a youth to Grade-II police constable post on account of a criminal case registered against him for taking part in a protest against NEET in 2017. It directed the TNUSRB and DGP to appoint him to the post.
Justice L Victoria Gowri, who passed the order, noted that the case against the petitioner, Arunkanth, was already closed when one of the co-accused approached the high court in February 2022. Though the high court, in the 2022 order, had specifically stated that the benefit of the order would enure in favour of the non-petitioning accused as well, the SP rejected Arunkanth's selection on May 16, 2023, by taking a stand that persons who are acquitted under the benefit of doubt or hostility of complaint will be treated as involved in a criminal case and will not be considered for appointment, the judge added.
The judge rejected this stand of the authorities by pointing out that Arunkanth was neither acquitted on the benefit of the doubt nor hostility of the complainant. "No charge sheet was filed in the case registered against him and it was closed based on the high court's order," she said.
She further observed that the authorities failed to consider the fact that there are no other criminal antecedents against Arunkanth. He had only exercised his fundamental right to protest by participating in the protest organised by his fellow students and definitely, it will not have any implication as to the nature of the job for which he has applied (Grade-II Police Constable), the judge opined and directed the government to issue appointment order to Arunkanth within three months.
Arunkanth, a B.Com (CA) graduate, applied for the post of Grade-II police constable post in 2022 and got qualified in the written examination and physical efficiency test. He was also called for a medical examination in April 2023. But the SP rejected his selection by citing the above criminal case, challenging which Arunkanth moved the high court.