IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3860 of 2010 1. PRIYAWRAT KUMAR @PRIYAWRAT YADAV S/O SHRI GOVIND PRASAD R/O VILL HARDIA,P.S.RAJAULI,DISTT-NAWADAH Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS GOVT.OF INDIA 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF C.R.P.F. C.R.P.F.,HEADQUARTER ,NEW DELHI 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL ,C.R.P.F. NORTHERN SECTOR,NEW DELHI 4. THE D.I.G.RANGE,NO.2 C.R.P.F.,AZMER 5. THE COMMANDANT-67 B.N. C.R.P.F.,SHILLONG MEGHALAYA 6. THE A.D.I.G.E.,GROUP CENTRE MOKAMA GHAT,BIHAR ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Ebrahim Kabir, Advocate. For the Union of India : Mrs. Kalpana (C.G.C.) ==== 2. 19.03.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Union of India who has filed counter affidavit which is taken on record. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the office order dated 10th July, 2009, Annexure-3, whereunder he has been removed from the 67th Battalion, C.R.P.F. with effect from 10.7.2009 i.e. after expiry of one month from the date of service of termination notice dated 1st June, 2009, Annexure-2 to this application. At the time of his enrolment in the Force petitioner has submitted Form No. 25 in which he had indicated that he is not accused in any criminal case. Form 25 was sent to the Superintendent of Police, Nawada for verification. The Superintendent of Police, Nawada under his letter no. 100/5 dated 19.2.2009 informed the Commandant that petitioner is accused in Case No. 162 of 2004 dated 25.12.2004 registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 452 and 307 of the Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act in which charge-sheet was submitted on 31.5.2005. 3. It is submitted by the counsel for the Union of India that the petitioner suppressed his involvement in the aforesaid case while submitting Form-25 and for suppressing such information his probation has been terminated. 4. Counsel for the petitioner in rejoinder submitted that recently - 2 - petitioner has been acquitted in the aforesaid case and in appreciation of the fact that he has been acquitted in the aforesaid case, the termination order be set aside. 5. Having heard counsel for the petitioner and the Union I find that the probation of the petitioner has been terminated on account of suppression of information in Form-25 , as such, even if he has been subsequently acquitted that cannot be a ground for this Court to set aside the order terminating the probation of the petitioner. It shall, however, be open for the petitioner to approach the departmental authorities and to bring to their notice his subsequent acquittal in the aforesaid case and if the authorities are so inclined, they are always at liberty to recall the termination of the petitioner. 6. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)