According to advocate, Ahmedi, the appellant truthfully disclosed his prosecution under section 363 (kidnapping) and 366.
Mumbai: The Supreme Court on October 12 set aside a Bombay high court order and directed the judicial department to freshly consider the application filed by a man for his appointment as Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC). The petitioner’s selection for the appointment as JMFC was cancelled due to the ‘character report of the police’ on the ground that he had faced criminal case in the past.
Mohammed Imran had approached the Supreme Court with the help of Jamiat-e-Ulema Maharashtra. According to Imran’s lawyer, Ansar Tamboli, the counsel Huzefa Ahmedi had contended before the court that the denial of appointment on grounds of moral turpitude is wrong and unsustainable.
According to advocate, Ahmedi, the appellant truthfully disclosed his prosecution under section 363 (kidnapping) and 366 (kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage, etc) and acquittal in 2004. It was also argued that Imran was acquitted before he cleared the examination for appointment in 2009. The lawyer also pointed out that in similar circumstance, another aspirant who was acquitted from sections 294 (Obscene acts and songs), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) of IPC has been appointed.
After hearing arguments the bench comprising Justice Kurian Joseph, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Navin Sinha held, “Undoubtedly, judicial service is very different from other services and the yardstick of suitability that may apply to other services, may not be the same for a judicial service. But there cannot be any mechanical incantation of moral turpitude, to deny appointment.”