Supreme Court of India· 11 August 2026

What two-pronged enquiry must an employer undertake before terminating an employee's services for suppression of criminal antecedents?

SHATRUGHN YADAV v. THE FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD. (F.A.C.T.) AND OTHERS

2026 INSC 829 · Civil Appeal No. [not yet numbered] of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No. 7197 of 2026)
Coram: Augustine George Masih; Sanjay Karol

🔖 Save this judgment 🔔 Follow s.323 Indian Penal Code, 1860 📬 Get today's judgments

View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.

Answer

The employer must first determine, as a question of fact, whether there has in truth been any suppression or furnishing of false information having regard to the candidate's knowledge and the circumstances of the declaration; and second, apply its mind to the specific facts and circumstances, including the type of suppression, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the nature of the post, before concluding that termination is the only option.

Headnote

Service Law — Suppression of criminal antecedents — Termination of service — Bona fide non-disclosure — Two-pronged enquiry — Service Law — Suppression of criminal antecedents — Knowledge is a pre-requisite for suppression — Held: Knowledge of a fact is a necessary pre-requisite for its non-disclosure; suppression presupposes an awareness of what is suppressed. Where a criminal antecedent is not shown to have been within the candidate's knowledge, he cannot be held to have suppressed it. (¶31) Service Law — Suppression of criminal antecedents — Two-pronged enquiry before termination — Held further: Before terminating services for suppression of criminal antecedents, the employer must undertake a two-pronged enquiry: whether there was in truth any suppression, having regard to the candidate's knowledge; and whether the facts, including gravity of the offence and the post, merit termination. (¶24) Service Law — Suppression of criminal antecedents — Onus on candidate to prove lack of awareness — Held further: Lack of awareness of a criminal antecedent is itself a fact that must be established by the candidate with cogent and reliable material; a bare plea of ignorance, without such material, will not suffice to escape liability. (¶32) Service Law — Termination without application of mind — Reinstatement — Held further: Since the authorities presumed that a criminal antecedent automatically rendered the appellant ineligible without the two-pronged enquiry, the termination is illegal and without application of mind; he is directed to be reinstated with consequential benefits, backwages restricted to 50%. (¶33, 34, 35)

In the Court's own words

Paragraph 24To summarise, the enquiry to be undertaken by the employer, before proceeding to terminate the services of an employee on the ground of suppression of information regarding criminal antecedents, is essentially two-pronged. The first is one of fact: whether there has, in truth, been any suppression or furnishing of false information by the candidate, having regard to the extent of his knowledge at the relevant time and the circumstances in which the declaration came to be made. The second prong of enquiry requires the authorities to apply their mind to the specific facts and circumstances of the case including the type of the suppression, the nature of allegations, role and gravity of the offence, the nature of the post and the duties attached to it and wherever relevant the effect thereof, and the eventual outcome of the criminal proceedings, if concluded, in order to arrive at a considered conclusion as to whether the continuation of the employee in service would not be feasible and the only option available is termination from service. It is only where both these stages of enquiries are undertaken and not otherwise, that an order of termination on this ground can be said to be sustainable in law.

Acts & Sections

s.323 Indian Penal Code, 1860s.504 Indian Penal Code, 1860

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of SHATRUGHN YADAV v. THE FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD. (F.A.C.T.) AND OTHERS — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment

In service law, does suppression of a criminal antecedent in a verification form require that the candidate had knowledge of the antecedent?Who bears the onus of proving that a candidate lacked awareness of a criminal antecedent at the time of making a declaration?Can termination of service be an automatic consequence of the existence of criminal antecedents disclosed or discovered after appointment?

Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections