Pendency Of Criminal Case Can Keep Selected Candidate Out Of Govt Job, Rajasthan High Court Says; Allows Joining After Acquittal
The Rajasthan High Court has held that State can withhold the appointment of a person against whom a criminal case is pending, since it could not be presumed that in a pending criminal case, a person seeking employment would be acquitted. The bench of former Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Chandra Shekha Sharma, opined that if a person, who was facing criminal charges,...
The Rajasthan High Court has held that State can withhold the appointment of a person against whom a criminal case is pending, since it could not be presumed that in a pending criminal case, a person seeking employment would be acquitted.
The bench of former Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Chandra Shekha Sharma, opined that if a person, who was facing criminal charges, was given employment, it would send a wrong message to other persons because such person's character could not be said to be clean and would be in cloud till he was acquitted.
For context, the Court was hearing a special appeal against the order of the trial court that directed the State to provide employment to the respondent-petitioner, opining that a pending criminal case could not be treated as a disqualification from public employment.
The respondent had participated in the recruitment process for the post of Basic Computer Instructor in which he was appointed subject to satisfactory verification of his character and criminal antecedents.
Eventually it was revealed that a criminal case was pending against him and the State declined the employment to the respondent. Hence, a petition was filed by the respondent in which the trial court concluded that merely a pending a criminal case was not a disqualification from public employment. Against this order, the present appeal was filed.
After hearing the contentions, the Court considered the fact that the single judge had relied upon a Supreme Court decision in Ranveer Kumar v Jodhpur Vidhyut Vit. Nigam Ltd. And Anr. in which it was held that presumption of innocence continued till the person was found guilty.
The Court observed that, “The view expressed in the case of Ranveer Kumar (supra), prima facie, is not sustainable in law, while it is true that presumption of innocence continues until a person is found guilty. The question before the Court is not of whether a person is guilty or not. It is a question whether such a person should be allowed to join the government service…The law laid down in the case of Ranveer Kumar (supra) is not with regard to appointment and the same is clearly distinguishable.”
It was opined that the State authorities were correct in withholding the appointment till the disposal of the criminal case.
The Court took into account the fact that during the pendency of the proceedings, the respondent was acquitted in the concerned criminal case, without any condition or bar.
In this background, while disagreeing with the opinion of the single judge, the Court held that since the respondent was already acquitted and was selected in the recruitment process, he should be allowed to join the service.
Accordingly, the order of the single judge was upheld, while not confirming is opinion in the matter.
Title: State of Rajasthan & Ors. v Jeetendra Kumar Choudhary
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 394
For Appellants: Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Ms. Pooja Sharma, AAAG and Mr. Vishal Kumar (for State)
For Respondents: Ms. Sarah Saurabh Sharma