RAVINDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 02.09.2019 (Annex.-6), whereby a decision has been taken by the respondents not to recommend the petitioner for appointment on account of the fact that acquittal of the petitioner in a criminal case was on account of having been given benefit of doubt and on account of compromise.

(2.) It is, inter alia, indicated that the petitioner got selected for the post of Constable, however, on account of the fact that the petitioner had been tried for offences under Sections 323, 341 read with Section 34 IPC, wherein while the petitioner was given benefit ouf doubt qua the offences under Section 324/34 IPC and qua offences under Sections 341 and 323 IPC he was acquitted on account of compromise, the matter was referred to Inspector General of Police (Recruitment), who by order dated 02.09.2019 (Annex.-6), has opined that as the acquittal was not honourable, the petitioner was not eligible for appointment.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment of this Court in Kuldeep Bhakar v. State of Raj. and Ors.: SBCW No. 19166/2018 and other connected matters, decided on 13.03.2019, whereby similar nature writ petitions were allowed and that the special appeal filed by the State in one of the case has been dismissed by the Division Bench in State of Raj. and Ors. v. Atma Ram : DBSAW No. 33/2020, decided on 27.01.2020 and, therefore, the order impugned passed by the respondents deserves to be set aside.