Chance for reformation has to be given to young offenders: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has said chance of reformation has to be accorded to young offenders in cases pertaining to jobs and an employer may ignore alleged suppression of their involvement in petty offences.
"Mere involvement in some petty kind of cases would not render a person unsuitable for the job," the bench comprising justices Ranjan Gogoi, Arun Mishra and PC Pant said.

"The 'McCarthyism' is antithesis to constitutional goal, chance of reformation has to be afforded to young offenders in suitable cases, interplay of reformative theory cannot be ruled out in toto nor can be generally applied but is one of the factors to be taken into consideration while exercising the power for cancelling candidature or discharging an employee from service," the bench said. The court's ruling came while resolving a conflict of opinion in various decisions of the division benches in the matter of question of suppression of information or submitting false information in the verification form as to the question of having been criminally prosecuted, arrested or as to pendency of a criminal case.

The bench referred to its earlier judgements in which it had held that in a democratic set up 'McCarthyism' is not healthy and some leniency to young people cannot be ruled out. "In case offence is petty in nature committed at young age, such as stealing a bread, shouting of slogans or is such which does not involve moral turpitude, cheating, misappropriation etc. or otherwise not a serious or heinous offence and accused has been acquitted in such a case when verification form is filled, employer may ignore lapse of suppression or submitting false information in appropriate cases on due consideration of various aspects," it said.

However, the bench said as a general rule, information given to the employer by a candidate as to conviction, acquittal or arrest, or pendency of a criminal case, whether before or after entering into service must be true and there should be no suppression or false mention of required information.  The bench, in its verdict, said, "In a case of deliberate suppression of fact with respect to multiple pending cases, such false information by itself will assume significance and an employer may pass appropriate order cancelling candidature or terminating services as appointment of a person against whom multiple criminal cases were pending may not be proper." The court, however, made an exception and said if the candidate was unaware of the criminal case pending at the time of application, the employer may take a decision after considering the seriousness of the crime.