JUDGMENT : ARUN MONGA, J. 1. Grievance of the petitioner herein inter alia is against an order dated 21.02.2023 (Annex.10), vide which, his result was kept in a sealed cover for promotion to the post of Vice Principal against the vacancies of the year 2022-2023. Further, he prays that the respondents be directed to promote the petitioner from the date, the persons junior to him have been so promoted with all consequential benefits. 2. Relevant facts of the case as pleaded by petitioner are that while he was serving on the post of Lecturer (Hindi), vide judgment/order dated 10.01.2020 (Annex.1), he was convicted for the offence under Sections 341, 323 & 325/34 IPC by the learned trial court. 2.2 The petitioner duly intimated the department about his conviction and suspension of sentence to the Principal. 2.3 On 14.07.2020, a charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 (‘the Rules of 1958’) charging him of not disclosing the information about his conviction for the offences under Sections 341, 323 & 325/34 IPC. 2.4 The petitioner submitted reply to the aforesaid charge-sheet. 2.5 However, vide order dated 21.09.2020 (Annex.6), the petitioner’s services were terminated on account of his conviction exercising the power conferred under Rule 19 of the Rules of 1958. 2.6 Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred SBCWP No.10281/2020 before this Court, wherein the impugned termination order was stayed vide order dated 05.10.2020 (Annex.7). 2.7. Against his conviction, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Merta. Vide an order dated 24.02.2022 (Annex.8), learned Sessions Judge though upheld the conviction, but granted benefit of probation under section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. It was also categorically stated that the same will not adversely affect the services of the petitioner. Vide application dated 14.03.2022 (Annex.9), the petitioner informed about the Sessions Court decision dated 24.02.2022. 2.8. Notwithstanding, the respondents when initiated promotion process, the result of the petitioner for promotion was kept in a sealed cover vide order dated 21.02.2023 (Annex.10). 3. Defence taken by the respondents in their reply inter alia is that it is admitted position that the petitioner was issued charge-sheet/memorandum of charges dated 14.7.2020 under Rule 16 of the Rules, 1958. 2.8. Notwithstanding, the respondents when initiated promotion process, the result of the petitioner for promotion was kept in a sealed cover vide order dated 21.02.2023 (Annex.10). 3. Defence taken by the respondents in their reply inter alia is that it is admitted position that the petitioner was issued charge-sheet/memorandum of charges dated 14.7.2020 under Rule 16 of the Rules, 1958. The trial court passed the judgment dated 10.01.2020, whereby the petitioner was held guilty of offences u/s 341, 323, 325 read with Section 34 IPC. Therefore, by an order dated 21.09.2020, petitioner's services were terminated. Thus, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief from this Court. 3.1 Against the order dated 21.09.2020, petitioner filed C.W. No.10281/2020, in which, this Court has stayed the termination order dated 21.9.2020 vide an interim order dated 5.10.2020. Aforesaid writ petition is still pending and it has not been decided on merits. Hence, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also perused the case file. 5. Before adverting to the merits of the claim of the petitioner qua the promotion through his second foray before this Court, it is pertinent to note that the withholding of the same is a consequence of criminal proceedings earlier initiated against him vide an FIR (C.I.S.) No. 1396/2014 under Sections 341, 323, 325/34 of the IPC and one has to necessarily, therefore, take into consideration the outcome thereof. 6. It transpires that the petitioner was originally convicted by the trial court, but the appellate court, taking a lenient view qua his role attributed as well as on the concession of the appellant, though upheld the conviction but keeping in view the reformative approach gave benefit of Sections 4 & 12 of the Act of 1958 and released the petitioner on probation. 7. In this context reference may be had to an earlier judgment rendered by me as a puisne judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Narsi vs. State of Haryana & Ors. : CRM-A-38-MA-2017 (O&M), decided on 17.07.2023, wherein it has been observed / held as below :- “11. 7. In this context reference may be had to an earlier judgment rendered by me as a puisne judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Narsi vs. State of Haryana & Ors. : CRM-A-38-MA-2017 (O&M), decided on 17.07.2023, wherein it has been observed / held as below :- “11. There is no gain saying that the relevant statutory provisions and the principles underlying and pertaining to release of offenders on probation, instead of straightaway sentencing them, need to be kept in mind by the Courts while passing sentencing orders. 11.1 Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (for short “Act”) was enacted in order to save offenders in appropriate cases from being habitual offenders by providing them with a chance to reform rather than dumpling into jails. For ready reference, Section 4 of Act is reproduced herein below: “Section 4 in The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 4. Power of court to release certain offenders on probation of good conduct.— (1) When any person is found guilty of having committed an offence not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and the court by which the person is found guilty is of opinion that, having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offender, it is expedient to release him on probation of good conduct, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the court may, instead of sentencing him at once to any punishment direct that he be released on his entering into a bond, with or without sureties, to appear and receive sentence when called upon during such period, not exceeding three years, as the court may direct, and in the meantime to keep the peace and be of good behaviour: Provided that the court shall not direct such release of an offender unless it is satisfied that the offender or his surety, if any, has a fixed place of abode or regular occupation in the place over which the court exercises jurisdiction or in which the offender is likely to live during the period for which he enters into the bond. (2) Before making any order under sub-section (1), the court shall take into consideration the report, if any, of the probation officer concerned in relation to the case. (2) Before making any order under sub-section (1), the court shall take into consideration the report, if any, of the probation officer concerned in relation to the case. (3) When an order under sub-section (1) is made, the court may, if it is of opinion that in the interests of the offender and of the public it is expedient so to do, in addition pass a supervision order directing that the offender shall remain under the supervision of a probation officer named in the order during such period, not being less than one year, as may be specified therein, and may in such supervision order, impose such conditions as it deems necessary for the due supervision of the offender. (4) The court making a supervision order under sub-section (3) shall require the offender, before he is released, to enter into a bond, with or without sureties, to observe the conditions specified in such order and such additional conditions with respect to residence, abstention from intoxicants or any other matter as the court may, having regard to the particular circumstances, consider fit to impose for preventing a repetition of the same offence or a commission of other offences by the offender. (5) The court making a supervision order under sub-section (3) shall explain to the offender the terms and conditions of the order and shall forthwith furnish one copy of the supervision order to each of the offenders, the sureties, if any, and the probation officer concerned. 11.2. Objectives and principles of criminal law as envisioned in the provision ibid, apart from deterrence against committing crime against society, are inter-alia focused on the reformation of offenders, which inheres the concept of probation. Modern criminal justice system often aims to balance punishment with rehabilitation, emphasizing the potential for positive change in individuals who have committed crime. The goal of criminal law extends beyond mere punishment. While punishment serves to deter and hold individuals accountable for their actions, there is a growing recognition of the importance of addressing the underlying factors that contribute to criminal behaviour. This perspective emphasizes the potentials of offenders to reform and reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens. Probation is one of the mechanisms used to achieve this reformation objective. In certain cases, certain offenders may be asked to remain under community supervision rather than being incarcerated. This perspective emphasizes the potentials of offenders to reform and reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens. Probation is one of the mechanisms used to achieve this reformation objective. In certain cases, certain offenders may be asked to remain under community supervision rather than being incarcerated. During such probation period, the offender can be put to follow certain conditions, such as regular reporting to a probation officer, participating in counselling or treatment programs and maintaining employment or education. The aim is to provide support, guidance and opportunities for the offender and to address the root causes of their criminal behaviour and develop positive life skills. Close monitoring and guidance provided during probation can help the offender make positive changes in their life and reduce the likelihood of reoffending. 11.3. Overall, the concept of focusing on reformation and using alternatives to imprisonment, such as release on probation, reflects a more holistic approach of criminal justice that takes into account the potential for positive change and the overall betterment of both the individual and society. 11.4 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. 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. 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. 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.” 8. In the view of aforesaid observations, what has to be thus promoted is not only the prevention of recidivism but also at the same time reintegration by way of providing reformative circumstances for the offender to absorb him back in the society as a productive citizen. 9. Here is a case where though the petitioner has been taken back in service after being released on probation but it appears that the competent authority is still considering his release on probation as some sort of a punitive approach adopted by the Court. On that ground, he has not considered the petitioner for the benefit of further promotion, despite categorical direction by the competent Court that the petitioner’s release on probation will not adversely affect the services of the petitioner. 10. On that ground, he has not considered the petitioner for the benefit of further promotion, despite categorical direction by the competent Court that the petitioner’s release on probation will not adversely affect the services of the petitioner. 10. Promotion is since an integral incidence to motivate an employee to continue working for his future progression, in the premise, I am of the view that petitioner cannot be denied the same on account his release on probation, that too with categorical direction by the competent Court that the same will not adversely affect the services of the petitione. There is no gainsaying to observe that the entire concept of release of the convict on probation instead of award of punishment is to reform a delinquent for his reintegration into the society. The punishment in criminal jurisprudence was originally devised to prevent recidivism and as a deterrent for the other society members not to indulge in crime. The main aim and object underlying the concept of release of the convict on probation instead of awarding punishment is to give him an opportunity to reform, become responsible and law abiding citizen, re-integrate and rehabilitate in the society as a useful and productive member and also to prevent overcrowing in jails and reduce the burden on the State qua the administration of the criminal justice system. 11. As an upshot, keeping the reformative approach as the key principle and the guiding light for rehabilitation and reformation of the offenders for release of the convicts on probation following conviction, more particularly in view of the categorical direction by the competent Court that the release of the petitioner on probation will not adversely affect his service, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be considered for the benefit of further promotion and be treated at par with his counter-parts. 12. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner by opening the sealed cover containing the petitioner’s result of the DPC for promotion as Vice Principal. In case, he is otherwise found more meritorious than the last selected candidate, he be given the benefit thereof in accordance with law. 13. In case, he is otherwise found more meritorious than the last selected candidate, he be given the benefit thereof in accordance with law. 13. Needless to say, if as a result of this exercise, the petitioner is found meritorious and promoted, he will be entitled to seniority in accordance with his merit with effect from the same date as his counter-parts were promoted. He shall be conferred all the future financial benefits with effect from the date the administrative order is passed, but shall not be entitled to any past financial benefits, the loss of which, in this case, cannot be attributed to the respondents. 14. Necessary exercise be carried out as expeditiously as possible, but not later than two months from the date petitioner approaches the respondents with the web-print of the instant order.