By Sumit Saxena
New Delhi, April 7 A false case of dog bite was foisted on 30-year-old Apoorva Pathak, jeopardising her aspiration of having a career in judiciary. Despite being selected as a civil judge, her name was deleted from the merit list, though she secured an acquittal on merits in the case.
However, there is some respite for Pathak from the Supreme Court, which earlier this week issued notice to Madhya Pradesh High Court and state government on her plea.
Pathak's plea contended that denial of appointment to her on the ground of previous criminal case in which she stands acquitted is violation of the fundamental right as prescribed under Article 14 of the Constitution, as she has not been treated equally and at par with other candidates.
"Material irregularity has been committed by the respondents while passing the impugned order whereby the name of the petitioner has been deleted from the list of selected candidates of civil judge without giving any reasonable opportunity of hearing on the basis of mere registration of matter registered against her under s.289 of IPC (biting by street dog) in which she has been acquitted on merits by the JMFC court," said the plea.
Advocate Namit Saxena, appearing for Pathak, submitted that the removal from the list is violative of the rules of the state government and the high court on the administrative side ought not to have overlooked the same while removing the name of the petitioner from the select list.
After hearing the arguments, a bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Ahsanuddin Amanullah said: "Issue notice, returnable in four weeks."
Pathak is a law graduate with distinction and gold medal from the university. She cleared the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services Examination – 2019 and was selected finally to be posted as a civil judge (junior division). While awaiting posting, she was shocked to note that her name has been deleted from the merit list/selection list.
"It is pertinent to note that at all stages of the judicial services examination i.e., prelims, mains and interview, the petitioner had mentioned the said fact of her being framed in a false case and that she has been acquitted by the trial court," said the plea.
The plea further contended that the high court failed to appreciate that that the registration of a FIR under section 289 is a petty offence which does not involve mens rea or moral turpitude and squarely falls within the guidelines laid down by the apex court in "Avtar Singh v Union of India".
"And does not amount to grievous offence as because the petitioner was not directly involved in the crime but was a mere victim who got injured while saving the street dog from beating by the complainant. Also, from the medical report of the complainant it has been proved that he was not bitten by any dog as such. The FIR was completely false and malicious hence the JMFC court, Bhopal was pleased to acquit the petitioner on merit," added the plea.
In a complaint made in February 2018, it was alleged that the petitioner made her pet dog bite the complainant and thereby omitted to take actions which are sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life, or any probable danger of grievous hurt.
The plea added that she was not provided any opportunity of hearing before the order was passed on December 5, 2022, and the order also failed to take into account the character certificate issued by the police department declaring her to be fit for public service.
The plea sought a direction to quash the December 5 order and also issue a direction to respondents to restore her candidature at merit number 12 on the selected list for the post of civil judge class-II (entry level) dated April 23, 2022.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor