Petitioner Merely A Co-accused & Not Beneficiary: Rajasthan HC Stays Suspension Order Of Medical Officer Allegedly Involved In Preparation Of Fabricated Mark-Sheet
The grievance of the Medical Officer arose out of a suspension order and a subsequent order whereby he was relieved from his posting.

The Rajasthan High Court recently stayed the suspension order passed against a Medical Officer who was accused of aiding in the preparation of a fabricated mark-sheet of some other candidate. The High Court noted that he is merely an under trial/ co-accused and not beneficiary of the said fabrication.
The grievance of the Medical Officer arose out of a suspension order and a subsequent order whereby he was relieved from his posting.
The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Arun Monga emphasized, “Thus, the petitioner is not beneficiary of the said fabrication, if any, which, in any case, is sub judice before competent court. At this stage, it is merely an allegation.”
Advocate Vivek Firoda represented the Petitioner.
Factual Background
The Petitioner had obtained a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to appear in NEET PG 2021. After qualifying, he was allotted a PG course in Radiodiagnosis. The petitioner was later relieved from the position of Medical Officer to join the PG course, and a three-year study leave was sanctioned for this purpose. However, in 2024, an FIR alleging fabrication of the educational degree of one Kamla Kumari, was registered under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of IPC. The petitioner was implicated in this case based on the statement of a co-accused and was subsequently arrested. Currently on bail, the petitioner is facing trial as a co-accused.
Following his release, the petitioner submitted an application to join the PG course. The petitioner was suspended on the ground of having remained in custody Hence, the instant petition was filed before the Court.
Reasoning
Reference was made by the Bench to one of the clauses of the Circular dated March 22, 2023 which talks about suspension and revocation of suspension in heinous & grievous offences by the police.
“In light of the above, it does appear that the competent authority, before passing the impugned order, first ought to have placed the case of the petitioner before the review committee. Given the sheer time lapse between the time when the petitioner was arrested and the time of passing the impugned order, coupled with the fact that, at this stage, petitioner is merely an under trial/ co-accused, since the trial has commenced after filing the chargesheet, his suspension may not be warranted”, the Bench held.
It was further noticed that the principal accused, who took the benefit of the fabricated mark-sheet was one Kamla Kumari. As per the Bench, the role attributed to the petitioner was merely that of a conspiracy in helping her to prepare the fabricated mark-shee and he was not a beneficiary of the said fabrication.
The Bench thus disposed of the Petition with a direction that the Petitioner’s case be placed before the Review Committee within 30 days upon the Petitioner approaching with the web-print of the instant order. The Bench also ordered, “Till the needful is done, the effect and operation of the impugned orders dated 19.12.2024 (Annex-17) & dated 03.01.2025 (Annex.18) shall remain stayed. In the parting, it is made clear that since the impugned orders have been stayed, petitioner shall be allowed to continue to carry on with his IIIrd year of the Post Graduation course at Dr. Sampurnanand Medical College (SNMC), Jodhpur.”
Cause Title: Suresh Kumar v. State Of Rajasthan & Ors. (Neutral Citation: [2025:RJ-JD:2224]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Vivek Firoda