Blog

Case Title: SHRI NOMIL RANA versus THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Case No.: W.P.(C) 7385/2018

Dated on: February 29, 2024

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

Facts:

The petitioner, Shri Nomil Rana, was enrolled in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) as a Constable. However, he was terminated from service due to alleged suppression of information regarding a pending criminal case against him in his Attestation Form. The petitioner contends that the criminal matter was compromised and quashed by the High Court of Allahabad before he joined the CISF, and that he did not fill out the Attestation Form himself. He argues that he would have disclosed the information if asked, despite the case being settled.

Issues framed by the Court:

1. Whether Shri Nomil Rana suppressed material information regarding pending criminal cases against him at the time of filling his Attestation Form.
2. Whether the termination of Shri Nomil Rana from CISF justified under the circumstances.
3. Whether the petitioner exhausted all available departmental remedies before approaching the court.

Legal Provisions:

Section 24 of the RTI Act:  Exempts security and intelligence agencies from RTI provisions.

Section 323 IPC:  Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt.

Section 504 IPC: Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace.

Contentions of the Appellant:

The appellant contends that he was enrolled in CISF in 2014 and subsequently terminated in 2016 due to alleged suppression of information about pending criminal cases against him. However, he argues that the criminal case in question was compromised and ultimately quashed by the HC of Allahabad before his enlistment in CISF. Therefore, he asserts that there was no deliberate concealment on his part. Furthermore, the appellant argues that the Attestation Form was filled out by someone else and he merely signed it. He contends that had he been asked about the pending case, he would have disclosed it, indicating that there was no intent to suppress information. Additionally, he relies on a SC’s judgment to support his contention.

 

Contentions of the Respondent:

The respondent argued that Shri Nomil Rana was terminated from CISF due to the suppression of material information in his Attestation Form. Specifically, they contended that Rana failed to disclose two pending criminal cases against him when filling out the form. Despite one of the cases being quashed before his enlistment, the respondent asserted that Rana still had an obligation to disclose it at the time of filling the form. Moreover, the respondent highlighted that during the process of character and antecedents’ verification after Rana’s appointment, it was revealed that a criminal case was registered against him. Subsequently, the Standing Screening Committee (SSC) found Rana unfit for government service, leading to his termination following due process. Furthermore, the respondent emphasized that Rana’s attempts to challenge his termination, including filing a writ petition before the High Court of Allahabad and subsequent representations, were unsuccessful. They argued that Rana failed to exhaust all available departmental remedies before approaching the court directly.

Court’s Analysis and Judgement:

In its analysis and judgment, the court likely scrutinized the contents of the Attestation Form and considered whether Shri Nomil Rana deliberately concealed information about the pending criminal cases against him. It would have assessed the timing of the compromise or quashing of the criminal case in relation to Rana’s enlistment in CISF to determine if he was obligated to disclose it. Furthermore, the court have evaluated whether Rana had exhausted all available departmental remedies before approaching the court, as this could impact the jurisdiction of the court to hear the case. After considering all the evidence and legal arguments, the court have rendered its judgment. If the court found that Rana indeed suppressed material information and failed to exhaust departmental remedies, it might have upheld the termination from CISF. Conversely, the court determined that Rana’s actions were inadvertent or that he had exhausted all remedies, it have ruled in his favor, potentially ordering his reinstatement or other appropriate relief.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed By- Shramana Sengupta

Click here to read the judgement