##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:3772]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2846/2016

Rakesh Kumar Chhilwal Son Of Sitaram Chhilwal (SC), aged

about 27 years, VPO Harsora, Tehsil Bansur, District Alwar,

Rajasthan

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary To The

Government, Department Of Home, Govt. Of Raja, Jaipur

2. Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur

3. Jaipur Commissioner Office Rajasthan Police, Jaipur

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tanveer Ahamad

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishnu Dutt Sharma, AAAG and

Mr. Parth Sharma for

Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

28/01/2026

1. The instant writ petition is preferred by petitioner with

following prayer:

“a) By an appropriate writ, order

and direction in the nature thereof

the action of the respondents of

not giving appointment to the

petitioner for lodging of criminal

case may kindly be quashed and

set aside.

b) By an appropriate writ, order

and direction the respondents may

be directed to give appointment to

the petitioner on the post of

Constable (GD) under SC Category

on merits under the command and

control of the Respondent No.3

with all consequential benefits.

c) Any other relief as this Hon’ble

Court may deem fit and proper be

(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 05:19:35 PM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 08:10:18 AM)

[2026:RJ-JP:3772] (2 of 4) [CW-2846/2016]

also passed in favour of the

Petitioner.”

2. Learned counsel for petitioner while referring and relying

upon judgment dated 13.08.2025 in D.B. Special Appeal

(Writ) No.971/2022 titled as “Babbal Singh Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors. submits that the controversy and the issue

raised herein is already settled by a Division Bench of this Hon’ble

Court. He further submitted that instant writ petition be disposed

of in accordance with aforesaid order.

3. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the

parties and also perused the material placed on record.

4. The issue pertains to recruitment on the post of Constable in

Rajasthan Police wherein the petitioner was denied appointment

on the ground that he was involved in a criminal case and this fact

was mentioned by the petitioner while filling up the application

form.

5. An identical issue was considered by the Division Bench of

this Court in the case of Babbal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan :

DB Special Appeal (Writ) No.971/2022, and also in judgment

dated 29.08.2025 in case of Shaitan LaL Kurach Vs. State of

Rajasthan and Ors. :DB Special Appeal (Writ) No.732/2022

and other connected matters.

6. The material on record indicate that FIR No.62/2014 was

registered at PS Harsora, District Alwar on 28.03.2014 wherein a

charge-sheet has been filed against several persons including

present petitioner. Arising out of said FIR, Sessions Case

No.5/2015 was disposed by the Court of learned Additional

(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 05:19:35 PM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 08:10:19 AM)

[2026:RJ-JP:3772] (3 of 4) [CW-2846/2016]

Sessions Judge, Bansur, Alwar on 06.08.2021 whereby the present

petitioner was acquitted on basis of compromise from charges

under Sections 341, 323, 325 read with Section 149 IPC but was

acquitted from charges under Sections 452, 147, 336, 308/149 of

IPC after benefit of doubt. The material on record indicate that 14

witnesses were examined by the prosecution and all material

witnesses including complainant and injured turned hostile and

not supported the story of prosecution. The trial Court has opined

that the prosecution has failed to establish the charges but still

given benefit of doubt to the petitioner-accused.

7. Considering the material placed on record and also the ratio

as laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in case of

Shaitan LaL Kurach Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors(supra)

and Babbal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan (supra), it is

appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the

petitioner to file a representation with direction to the

respondent(s) to examine the case of present petition