The Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur has dismissed the State’s appeal against an order directing the appointment of a Basic Computer Instructor whose joining had been withheld because a criminal case was pending against him. The Division Bench noted that the candidate had subsequently been acquitted by the trial court and upheld the direction allowing him to join with notional benefits.
Background
The Rajasthan Staff Selection Board had issued an advertisement on February 1, 2022, for recruitment to the post of Basic Computer Instructor. Jeetendra Kumar Choudhary was selected and appointed through an order dated April 13, 2023, subject to satisfactory verification of his character and antecedents.
During verification, the authorities found that an FIR had been registered against him at Police Station Toonga, Jaipur, and that a charge-sheet had been filed before the competent court in 2013. Criminal proceedings were still pending when the authorities decided not to permit him to join the post.
Choudhary then approached the High Court seeking permission to join and requesting that his appointment not be cancelled merely because of the pending criminal proceedings.
A Single Judge allowed his writ petition on May 2, 2025, directing the authorities to permit him to join as Basic Computer Instructor and granting consequential benefits in notional terms from the date other candidates appointed under the same order had joined.
The Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Chandra Shekhar Sharma examined the State’s challenge to the Single Judge’s order.
The State relied on Department of Personnel circulars concerning candidates facing criminal proceedings and argued that the pendency of the criminal case was sufficient to make the respondent ineligible for appointment.
The Bench, however, drew a distinction between the situation while criminal proceedings remain pending and the position after acquittal. The Court also considered the earlier judgment in Ranveer Kumar, observing that its proposition regarding appointment during the pendency of criminal proceedings could not be applied in the present circumstances.
"Since he has already been selected, he should be allowed to join," the Bench observed, after taking note of the subsequent acquittal.
The Court noted that Choudhary had been acquitted by the trial court on December 4, 2025, during the pendency of the appeal. On examining the trial court judgment, the Bench recorded that the case had arisen from a complaint involving a dispute between the parties, while the trial court had found that the complainant side had entered the field where the respondent’s family members were cultivating.
The High Court further noted that the medical reports were not proved, did not match the allegations, and no weapon had been recovered from Choudhary.
The Division Bench dismissed the State’s special appeal and upheld the Single Judge’s May 2, 2025 order. It held that, in the circumstances of the case, Choudhary could be permitted to join the service, with the notional seniority and consequential benefits directed by the Single Judge.
All pending applications were also disposed of.
Case Details:
Case Title: State of Rajasthan & Others v. Jeetendra Kumar Choudhary
Case Number: D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 210/2026
Judge: Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Chandra Shekhar Sharma
Decision Date: September 5, 2026
-300x169.webp)
