The Tribunal has directed the Army to reinstate a soldier who was recruited in 2021 and dismissed from service in 2023 after an adverse report from the district magistrate stated that a case was registered against him in 2017 and the same was under consideration in court

The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has held that a recruit cannot be held responsible for withholding information about his name figuring in a criminal case, of which he was not aware of, if the police verification report at the time of recruitment is clear.

The Tribunal has directed the Army to reinstate a soldier who was recruited in 2021 and dismissed from service in 2023 after an adverse report from the district magistrate stated that a case under various sections of the Indian Penal Code for rioting, damage to public property and intimidation was registered against him in 2017 and the same was under consideration in court.

“We find that offence of the applicant for not disclosing the information of his involvement in civil / criminal case in enrolment form during his recruitment in the Indian Army is of a trivial nature as the applicant was not actually aware about such pending criminal case against him because the character certificate dated 22.02.2021 issued by the office of Senior Superintendent of Police before his recruitment in the Army reflects non-involvement of the applicant in any civil/criminal case in police records,” the Tribunal’s Bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Gupta and Maj Gen Sanjay Singh ruled in their order of November 2.

The soldier was enrolled in the Indian Army in April 2021. In October 2021, the adverse verification report from the district magistrate was received by the Army, following which he was served a show-cause notice in December 2021.

In his reply, he claimed that he was not aware of the registration and pendency of any such criminal case against him. He said that during the recruitment process, he had done his police verification online and as per the character certificate issued in February 2021, nothing adverse was found against him.

Thereafter, he was issued another letter in July 2022, asking him to give the progress of the case. Subsequently, he was discharged from service in September 2023 under provisions of Army Rule 13 and Para 1299 of the Combined Record of Instructions, 2012, for his alleged involvement in the said criminal case.

In March 2025, the accused in the case, including the soldier, were exonerated. After getting a certified copy of the judgment, he approached the Army for reinstatement in service, but it was denied on grounds that he had already been discharged.

Placing reliance on earlier judgements, the Tribunal held that the approach should be to condone minor indiscretions made by young people rather than to brand them as criminals for the rest of their lives.

The Bench observed that the criminal case against the applicant was decided by the Court of Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli, vide order dated March 1, 2025, and the applicant was exonerated of the charges. “Therefore, the unintentional suppression of such material facts at the time of enrolment can be ignored and in view of the aforesaid judgments of the Apex Court and Allahabad High Court,” the Bench said.

Holding that the case of the applicant is considerable and the applicant is liable to be reinstated into service, the Bench set aside the order of discharge. The Bench directed that he be reinstated into service in the same rank/post from which he was discharged, and though he would not be entitled for any back wages for the period he was not in service, his original seniority and parity with his batch mates will be maintained.