JUDGMENT :

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. 

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 09.10.2019 whereby respondent has refused to allot him regimental number. He is further seeking direction to respondents to issue him joining/appointment letter.

2. The petitioner, pursuant to Advertisement No.3/2018, applied for the post of Constable under BCA Category. He successfully cleared Written Test followed by Physical Measurement and Physical Screening Test. The respondent, during verification of his credentials, found that an FIR No.284 dated 18.09.2017 under Sections 346, 323, 328, 342, 363, 366 376 and 112 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and Section 3 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘SC/ST Act’) at Police Station Khol, District Rewari was registered against him. On account of said FIR, the respondent refused to issue appointment/joining letter which has forced the petitioner to file the instant petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no column in the application form with respect to concluded criminal case especially where candidate has been acquitted, thus, petitioner in the application form could not disclose factum of his acquittal in criminal case. He was acquitted by Trial Court vide judgment dated 07.02.2018. The respondent has rejected his claim relying upon Rule 12.18(3)(e) of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (as applicable to State of Haryana) (for short ‘PPR’). Said Rule is inapplicable to him because he was not acquitted on technical grounds. There is no delay in approaching this Court. He preferred CWP No.25420 of 2019 which was withdrawn on 03.12.2025 with liberty to file afresh with better particulars. CWP No.25420 of 2019 was filed without assailing order impugned herein, thus, aforesaid writ petition was withdrawn and present petition has been filed.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that petitioner was implicated in heinous crime of rape of a scheduled caste girl. He was acquitted because prosecutrix turned hostile. As per Rule 12.18(3)(e) of PPR, a candidate cannot be offered post of Constable if he is implicated in a heinous crime and acquitted on technical grounds. Rape in the aforesaid Rule has been considered as heinous crime and he was acquitted on technical ground i.e. prosecutrix turned hostile, thus, there is no infirmity in the impugned order.

5. Heard the arguments and perused the record.

6. The petitioner pursuant to aforesaid advertisement applied for the post of Constable. He cleared all the stages of recruitment process. The respondent conducted police verification and found that he was implicated in a criminal case. The respondent vide impugned order dated 09.10.2019 has held that petitioner cannot be considered for allotment of regimental number in view of Rule 12.18(3)(e) of PPR.

7. The impugned order as well as arguments of learned State counsel is based upon reading of Rule 12.18 of PPR, thus, it is inevitable to examine whether said Rule was violated by the petitioner entailing cancellation of his appointment. For the ready reference, Rule 12.18 of PPR is reproduced as below:

“12.18. Verification of character and antecedents:-

(1) The appointing authority shall send the verification forms of candidates recommended for appointment by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission to the district police and Criminal Investigation Department with a copy to the District Magistrate for the verification of character and antecedents, as per Form No. 12.18 and Government instructions issued from time to time on the subject.

(2) The candidate shall disclose the fact regarding registration of FIR or criminal complaint against him for any offence under any law along-with the current status of such case in application form and verification cum attestation form irrespective of the final outcome of the case. Non-disclosure of such information shal