New Delhi: The Supreme Court has ruled that a consensual premarital relationship between two unmarried adults cannot be treated as moral turpitude or used as a basis to question a person’s character, while allowing the appointment of a candidate to the Telangana Police force whose recruitment had been cancelled due to a past criminal case linked to a personal relationship.
A bench comprising Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Manmohan set aside the Telangana government’s decision to deny the candidate employment, observing that the case had already been settled amicably before a Lok Adalat.
Court Recognises Changing Social Realities
The apex court emphasised that authorities must remain sensitive to evolving social norms and changing societal realities. It observed that premarital relationships between consenting adults have become increasingly common and that no law prohibits two unmarried adults from entering into such a relationship.
The court further noted that a consensual physical relationship between adults should not, by itself, lead to adverse conclusions regarding an individual’s character or suitability for public employment. It highlighted that courts have, in several instances, quashed criminal proceedings arising out of such relationships when consent was established.
Recruitment Cancelled Over Past Complaint
The petitioner had disclosed the existence of the criminal case during the recruitment process and informed authorities that the matter had been settled amicably. The dispute arose after the candidate married another woman, following which his former partner filed a complaint against him.
Despite the settlement, authorities denied him appointment, citing concerns about his character and antecedents.
No Adverse Inference Warranted: Supreme Court
Rejecting the state’s argument that even a slight doubt about a candidate’s character could justify denying public employment, the Supreme Court observed that there was no basis for drawing adverse conclusions in the present case.
The court noted that the complainant had voluntarily chosen not to pursue the matter further and had consented to the settlement. In such circumstances, treating the candidate as unsuitable for police service was unjustified.
The judgment reinforces the principle that personal relationships between consenting adults cannot automatically be equated with misconduct or moral turpitude and that recruitment decisions must be based on objective assessment rather than social assumptions or moral perceptions.
