The Supreme Court on Monday observed that consensual pre-marital relationships between unmarried adults cannot, by themselves, be treated as evidence of questionable character.

The top court’s ruling came while it ordered the appointment of a police constable candidate from Telangana, whose selection had been cancelled over a criminal case stemming from a failed romantic relationship. The bench noted that character verification in public service recruitment must be based on objective considerations rather than personal moral perceptions.

A bench comprising Justices Manoj Misra and Manmohan underscored that modern society increasingly witnesses consensual relationships between adults outside marriage and that no law prohibits such relationships.

Character assessment must be objective, says bench

Delivering the verdict, the court said that authorities cannot presume that being part of a consensual relationship reflects adversely on a person’s integrity, honesty of suitability for public service. It remarked, “Physical relationship between two consenting unmarried adults cannot and should not by itself be a ground to draw an adverse impression about the character of the person in that relationship.”

The justices clarified further that recruitment agencies are entitled to assess criminal antecedents, particularly for disciplined forces. However, the assessment must lay emphasis on indicators such as criminality, violence, dishonesty or conduct incompatible with public service rather than subjective notions of morality.

Recruitment called off despite full disclosure

The case concerned a candidate who had disclosed in his application that a criminal case had been filed against him by a woman with whom he was allegedly in a relationship for four years.

As per the complaint, the woman accused him of promising to marry her, postponing it repeatedly and later marrying someone else. Based on the allegations, the police booked the man under provisions pertaining to cheating and criminal intimidation. Notably, the investigating police personnel found no basis for any allegation of rape.

However, the dispute never proceeded to trial. Instead, both parties reached a settlement before a Lok Adalat, resulting in the case being compounded and closed.

Despite the compromise and the candidate’s transparency regarding the incident, recruitment authorities deemed him unsuitable for appointment, contending that the settlement amounted to an admission of guilt.

Court trashes recruitment board’s reasoning

The Apex court firmly disagreed with the conclusion, describing the recruitment board’s reasoning as ‘without any basis’ and completely perverse. The bench took note of the fact that not every relationship culminates in marriage and that the failure of a relationship cannot be equated with cheating or moral misconduct.

The court reaffirmed the principle of presumption of innocence, holding that there was no material to justify adverse conclusions about the candidate’s character. Consequently, it restored the earlier order directing his induction as a police constable, setting aside the contrary ruling of the division bench of the Telangana High Court (HC).