IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI PRINCIPAL BENCH AT GUWAHATI
PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA, J.
Saroj Sarma
Versus
State of Assam Rep. by the PP
Bail Appln./399/2021, Bail Appln./2801/2020 and Bail Appln./2806/2020
Decided on : 25-06-2021
Bail - Question Paper Leak - Section 120B/418/420 IPC - [Section 120B/418/420 IPC] - The court discussed the bail applications of the petitioners, Saroj Sarma and Diban Deka, who were involved in the organized crime of leaking question papers for a police recruitment exam. The court considered various legal principles and precedents related to bail under Section 439 CrPC, including the nature of accusations, severity of punishment, character of the accused, and the likelihood of the offense being repeated. The court rejected the bail applications, emphasizing the seriousness of the offense and the prima facie evidence against the petitioners.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were involved in leaking question papers for a police recruitment exam, organizing mock tests with leaked papers, and inducing candidates in exchange for money. The court considered the bail applications of the petitioners, who were accused of Section 120B/418/420 IPC offenses related to the organized crime of question paper leak.
Finding of the Court:
The court rejected the bail applications of the petitioners, emphasizing the seriousness of the offense and the prima facie evidence against them. The court considered various legal principles and precedents related to bail under Section 439 CrPC, including the nature of accusations, severity of punishment, character of the accused, and the likelihood of the offense being repeated.
Issues: The court considered the bail applications of the petitioners, who were accused of Section 120B/418/420 IPC offenses related to the organized crime of question paper leak. The issues revolved around the nature of accusations, severity of punishment, character of the accused, and the likelihood of the offense being repeated.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that question paper leak is an organized crime and an offense against the society at large. The court considered various legal principles and precedents related to bail under Section 439 CrPC, including the nature of accusations, severity of punishment, character of the accused, and the likelihood of the offense being repeated. The court rejected the bail applications, emphasizing the seriousness of the offense and the prima facie evidence against the petitioners.
Final Decision: The bail applications of Saroj Sarma and Diban Deka were rejected by the court, considering the seriousness of the offense and the prima facie evidence against them.
JUDGMENT :
PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA, J.
1. Since all the three bail applications have arisen out of the same FIR, they are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.
2. Heard the learned Sr. Counsel Mr. N. Dutta, learned counsel Mr. B.K. Mahajan, appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P.P. Baruah, learned P.P., Assam assisted by Mr. D. Das, learned Addl. P.P. for the State of Assam.
3. The petitioners, namely, Sri. Saroj Sarma and Diban Deka have prayed for releasing them on bail under Section 439 Cr.PC, who are in detention in connection with Crime P.S. Case No. 13/2020 under Section 120B/418/420 IPC.
4. The factual matrix leading the arrest of the petitioners - the State Level Police Recruitment Board published an advertisement seeking on-line application from the eligible candidates for filling up 597 posts of S.I. of Police in Assam Police. The advertisement was published on 06.011.2019. More than 90,000 candidates filed their applications. Out of them, about 66,000 candidates downloaded the E-Admit cards for appearing in the examination, but before that, the question papers were leaked and circulated in WhatsApp, as a result of which, the written test was cancelled. The Chairman of the State level Police Recruitment Board lodged the FIR alleging the aforesaid facts. The informant has mentioned in the FIR that he got the information about the leakage through a WhatsApp message sent to him by a person called Sri. Gautam Mech.
5. The police conducted an investigation. Several persons were arrested. Finally, police filled charge sheet. It may be mentioned that some persons, who are shown as accused in the charge sheet, were never arrested by police. They received summons from the court below and were released on bail. In fact, 26 persons, who are charge sheeted were already released on bail by the Special Judge, Assam. The bail application of the petitioner, Saroj Sarma was rejected by the court below.
6. The specific allegation against the present petitioners, Saroj Sarma and Diban Deka are as follows:
He is found to be one of the prime accused persons along with accused Rubul Hazarika, Prasanta Kumar Dutta, Kumar Sanjit Krishna and others, who are involved in the offence of leaking the question paper of the written examination for the post of SI(UB) of Police and circulated the leaked question papers through Whatsapp messages and by other means to candidates in exchange of huge sum of money. In furtherance of the conspiracy, he along with Rubul Hazarika met Kumar Sanjit Krishna, the then Superintendent of Police, Karimganj & Chairman, District Level Selection Committee, at Karimganj on 12/09/2020. They conspired thereto leak the question paper prior to the scheduled examination date i.e. 20-09-2020 from the custodian of question papers, i.e. Kumar Sanjit Krishna. As desired by Kumar Sanjit Krishna, he arranged secret mobile handsets and fake SIM card for use by Kumar Sanjit Krishna and other perpetrators to keep their conspiracy as secret. He also provided his white colour Google mobile phone and necessary materials like sealing wax, blade, cutter, adhesive tape etc. for opening and resealing the packets of question papers to Rubul Hazarika on 18/09/2020 at the time of proceeding from Guwahati to Karimganj. Accused Rubul Hazarika took photograph of the leaked question papers from the custodian, i.e. Kumar Sanjit Krishna, the then Superintendent of Police, Karimganj & Chairman, District Level Selection Committee, Karimganj, in exchange of rupees forty lakhs. As per the instruction of Saroj Sarma, his employee Jitul Jyoti Sandilya delivered the money as demanded by Kumar Sanjit Krishna in a backpack to Subrata Sarkar, husband of Sukanya Sarkar, near Chung-fa restaurant, on Mother Teressa Road, Geetanagar at the night of 18/09/2020. On receipt of the leaked question papers from Nipu Phukan, he got the answers of the questions papers printed in the house of Hira Choudhury. At the instruction of Saroj Sarma,
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar
Bikramjit Singh v. State of Punjab
Achpal @ Ramswaroop v. State of Rajasthan
Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Sube Singh v. State of Haryana
Mohd. Hussain Umar Kochra v. K.S. Dalipsinghji
The State of Andhra Pradesh v. Kandimalla Subbaiah
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan reported in (2005) 2 SCC 42
Prahlad Singh Bhati v. NCT. Delhi reported in (2001) 4 SCC 280
Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh reported in (2002) 3 SCC 598
Vaman Narain Ghiya v. State of Rajasthan reported in (2009) 2 SCC 281
Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee reported in (2010) 14 SCC 496
Neeru Yadav v. State of U.P. reported in (2014) 16 SCC 508
Ajmer Singh v. State of Haryana reported in (2010) 3 SCC 746
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.