Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mohammed Aslam Silawat vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:2539) on 15 January, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:2539]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 585/2025
Mohammed Aslam Silawat S/o Late Shri Arif Silawat, Aged About
28 Years, R/o Sadar Bazar, Hurda Seja, Bhilwara (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, The Director, Secondary Education,
Rajasthan, Bikaner (Raj.).
2. The District Education Officer, (Head Quarter), Secondary
Education, Bhilwara (Raj.).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Arora.
Mr. Hardik Gautam.
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order (Oral)
15/01/2025
1. Assailed herein is an order dated 16.09.2024 (Annex.3), vide
which, petitioner's application for appointment on compassionate
grounds was rejected solely on account of his conviction by the
trial court under Section 323 read with Section 341 of IPC, despite
the fact that the trial did not impose any sentence on the
petitioner, but merely imposed a fine of Rs. 500/- while extending
the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act.
2. Briefly speaking relevant facts as pleaded in the petition are
as follows:-
2.1. The father of the petitioner was serving as an Assistant
Administrative Officer at the Government Higher Secondary School
in Aasind, District Bhilwara (Rajasthan), until his death on
[2025:RJ-JD:2539] (2 of 5) [CW-585/2025]
13.11.2023. Following his father's demise, the petitioner applied
for compassionate appointment to the post of Junior Assistant on
21.12.2023. On 16.09.2024, the respondent No. 1 issued an office
order listing individuals appointed on compassionate grounds,
along with their respective district allotments. The petitioner's
name appears at Serial No. 11 on the list, with Bhilwara District
allotted to him. It is important to note that in 2020, an FIR was
registered against the petitioner under Sections 323 and 341 of
the IPC, and after a trial, he was convicted but he was let off on
Probation with a fine of Rs. 500/-. This information was disclosed
in the Police Verification Report submitted to the department.
Despite this, on 04.11.2024, respondent No. 2 wrote to
respondent No. 1 seeking further instructions regarding the
issuance of the petitioner's appointment letter, considering his
conviction. However, no final order regarding his appointment has
been passed. In light of these circumstances, the petitioner sent a
notice on 16.12.2024 demanding justice and requesting
compassionate appointment due to his father's death, but his case
has yet to be considered. Hence, this petition.
3. A perusal of the office order dated 16.09.2024 (Annex.3)
passed by the competent authority reflects that as far as the
appointment to the petitioner as Junior Assistant on
compassionate grounds is concerned, there is no quibble about
the same.
4. However, despite the allotment of the district to the
petitioner, he has not been allowed to join on the post in question.
Apparently, on the ground of previous criminal proceedings, as
above.
[2025:RJ-JD:2539] (3 of 5) [CW-585/2025]
5. The State did not file appeal against the said trial court
order/judgment. The same has thus attained finality. I am of the
view that once the petitioner was let off on probation he has to be
given benefit of the very reason and the objective of enactment of
Probation of Offenders Act.
6. In this context, reference may be had to a judgment
rendered by me while I was a Judge in Punjab and Haryana High
Court, in similar circumstances, in a case titled Nasri Vs. State
of Haryana.: CRM-A-38-MA-2017, relevant whereof, for ready
reference, is reproduced as below :-
"Probation can thus also be termed as an alternative form of
punishment envisaged within the criminal justice system. In my opinion,
following principles or what can be termed as potential benefits of
release on probation ought to be kept in mind by the learned sentencing
Courts below for exercise of judicial discretion to grant probation,
provided a deserving case is made out.
a) Nature of the Offense: The severity and type of offense committed by
the individual are important considerations. Less serious offenses, such
as non-violent crimes or violent but arising out of self defense or first
time offenses, might make an individual more eligible for probation.
b) Individualized Justice: Before grant of the benefit of release on
probation, one has to take into consideration the individual
circumstances of the offender viz., the nature of the crime vis-a-vis the
potential for positive change. It allows for tailored sentencing that
considers the unique needs and characteristics of the offender,
promoting a more just and proportionate response to the offense.
c) Criminal History: A convict's prior criminal history must be assessed
to determine if they have a pattern of repeat offenses. A history of violent
or serious crimes might make an individual less likely to be granted
probation.
d) Rehabilitation Potential: The offender's willingness and potential to
rehabilitate play a significant role. If there's evidence that the individual
is committed to changing their behavior, participating in counseling, and
addressing the underlying causes of their criminal activity, they ought to
be considered for probation.
e) Compliance with Probation Terms: Convicts on probation are
required to follow specific conditions, such as regular reporting to a
probation officer, avoiding criminal activity, and attending counseling or
rehabilitation programs. A person's willingness and ability to comply
with these terms would influence their eligibility for probation.
[2025:RJ-JD:2539] (4 of 5) [CW-585/2025]
f) Preventing Recidivism:- Probation, as an alternative to incarceration,
can indeed help prevent first-time offenders from becoming habitual or
"hardened" criminals. By providing rehabilitation and support services,
probation aims to address the underlying factors that contribute to
criminal behaviour, giving offenders a chance to change their ways.
g) Community Ties: An assessment of offender's ties to the community,
such as family, employment, and stable housing ought to be carried out.
Strong community ties can indicate a support system that can help
prevent further criminal activity.
h) Risk to Public Safety: The safety of the community is a crucial factor.
Assessments are made to determine whether releasing an individual on
probation poses a low risk of committing new offenses or harming
others.
i) Reducing Overcrowding:- Probation can help alleviate the
overcrowding of jails and prisons. Non-violent offenders who are eligible
for probation can be kept under community supervision, freeing up space
in correctional facilities for more serious offenders.
j) Promoting productivity:- By allowing offenders to remain in the
community and engage in productive activities such as work, education,
or community service, probation can contribute to making them
productive members of society. This, in turn, can lead to them
contributing as taxpayers instead of being a burden on the State.
k) Second chance and Reformation:- Probation offers a second chance
to offenders by allowing them to avoid imprisonment and providing an
opportunity for reformation. Through counselling, treatment, and
supervision, offenders can address the root causes of their criminal
behaviour and work towards positive change.
l) Reintegration into Society: Probation allows offenders to maintain ties
with their families, jobs and communities, which can enhance their
chances of successful reintegration after their sentence. This reduces the
likelihood of recidivism and helps break the cycle of criminal behaviour.
m) Compensation to the aggrieved: Court can even ask the offender to
pay compensation (by way of penalty) to the aggrieved person as means
of retribution or penance as a pre condition of release on probation.
n) Probation Officer Assessment: Probation officer may be asked by a
court to conduct an assessment of the offender to gather information
about their background, behavior, and potential for rehabilitation. Such
an assessment would help take an informed decision regarding
probation.
o) Judicial Discretion: In the end, depending on facts and circumstances
of the case, it is the discretion of court to determine whether to grant
probation. It shall consider all relevant factors and balance the interests
of rehabilitation, public safety, and justice in the decision-making
process. The goal of probation is to offer an alternative to incarceration
that addresses the individual needs of the offender while maintaining
public safety."
[2025:RJ-JD:2539] (5 of 5) [CW-585/2025]
7. The noble intent of enacting the Probation of Offenders Act is
recidivism, rehabilitation as well as re-integration of an offender
into the society. Thus not granting appointment to the petitioner
would defeat the very purpose of the same.
8. As an upshot, the petition is disposed of with a direction to
the respondents that if the petitioner's appointment is being
withheld merely due to his having been let off on probation by the
trial court, this shall not be considered as an impediment. If the
petitioner is found otherwise eligible and meritorious, he will be
allowed to join his services in the district already allotted to him,
upon his approaching competent authority of the respondents with
a web print of the instant order.
9. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA),J
40-Jitender - Sumit /-
Whether Fit for Reporting: Yes / No
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
