Siddhartha Varma, J. - (1.) The appellant upon his selection as a constable was required to submit an affidavit mentioning therein, among other things, that no criminal case was registered against him. He was also required to mention in the affidavit that if any criminal case was registered, then how it had ended. When the character verification took place it transpired that in fact he was tried by a court of sessions in S.T. No. 57 of 2002 and was acquitted therein. But as the appellant had not given the mandatory information in his affidavit it had resulted in the impugned order dated 06.08.2006 by which the Senior Superintendent of Police, Gorakhpur, had cancelled the selection of the appellant. Against the order dated 06.08.2006, the appellant filed a writ petition No. 61215 of 2006 which was dismissed on 09.11.2006.
(2.) Aggrieved by the order dated 09.11.2006, the present Special Appeal has been filed.
(3.) The contention of the appellant is that when he was tried, he was only 16 years of age and thus was a minor and that the allegations against him were also very trivial. He, along with a few others, was tried under Sections 308/34, 323/34, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and was honourably acquitted. Further contention of the appellant is that the non-mentioning of the criminal trial occurred chiefly because of the fact that he was under a mistaken impression that as he was acquitted in the trial there was no necessity to mention about it in the affidavit. Further more, it was argued that besides the above mentioned criminal case he was never involved in any other crime.;