SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Pat) 443

SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH
Sheela Kumar W/o Arvind Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar Through Vigilance – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.

1. Heard Sri Khurshid Alam, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rakesh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Vigilance Department.

2. This revision application is directed against the order dated 12-12-2008, passed by learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Patna, in Special Case No. 30 of 2005, whereby he has rejected the petition of the petitioners under Section 205 of the Cr.P.C.

3. Petitions are facing prosecution under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 201/120-B, IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section (1)(d) of the P.C. Act.

4. The prosecution case in short is that a limited competitive examination of Government employees for appointment/promotion to the post of Bihar Administrative Service, Class II was conducted by the Bihar State Public Service Commission (BPSC). The examination has been termed as First Limited competitive examination. Only Government employees in Class III who had put in a given number of years in service were eligible to appear in this examination. It is alleged that a large number of candidates got themselves declared successful by adopting unfair and dubious means with tacit connivance of the officials of the C


















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top