In cases involving systemic corruption and mass rigging of public recruitment examinations, the gravity of the offense and impact on public interest override individual pleas for bail based on custody duration or parity, provided there is prima facie evidence of complicity.

Order :

ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.

1. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1158/2026 ( Sher Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan ), Bail Application No. 2627/2026 ( Ashok Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan ), Bail Application No. 3104/2026 ( Chunaram Vs. State of Rajasthan ), 2nd Bail Application No. 3105/2026 ( Anil Kumar Meena @ Sher Singh Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan ), 2nd Bail Application No.4005/2026 ( Harshvardhan Kumar Meena V. State of Rajasthan ), Bail Applicatioin No.4632/2026 ( Kunal Choudhary Vs. State of Rajasthan ), 3rd Bail Application No.5781/2026 ( Ramesh Kumar Vishnoi Vs. State of Rajasthan ), 2nd Bail Application No.7105/2026 ( Paurav Kaler Vs. State of Rajasthan ) and Bail Application No.7106/2026 ( Ashok Kumar S/o Jagmalram Vs. The State of Rajasthan ) are filed under Section 483 of BNSS in relation to FIR No. 10/2024 dated 03.03.2024 registered at Police Station Special Police Station (SOG), District ATS and SOG for the offence under Sections 419, 420, 408, 409, 467, 468, 471, 477, 477A, 201, 109 read with Sections 34 and 120-B of IPC and under Sections 3 , 4, 5 and 6 of Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 1992 (for short 'the Act of 1992') and under Section 66D of IT Act.

2. S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.3889/2026 ( Abhay Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan ), Bail Application No. 5103/2026 ( Kamlesh Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan ), Bail Application No. 5782/2026 ( Ganpat Ram Bishnoi Vs. State of Rajasthan ) and Bail Application No. 6448/2026 ( Subhash Muwal Vs. State of Rajasthan ) are filed for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of BNSS in same FIR.

3. Since all these matters pertain to same set of facts and same FIR, therefore we are deciding these bail applications with a common order.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sher Singh submitted that the allegation upon the present petitioner is appearing for himself in the examination of Sub-Inspector on 14th September, 2021 and also appearing as dummy candidate on 13th and 15th September, 2021 on behalf of Mangalaram and Manohar Singh. He submitted that the petitioner was selected, and Mangalaram was not selected but Manohar Singh was selected. He also submitted that both Mangalram and Manohar were granted bail. He also submitted that till date, no FSL report has been filed to show that the present petitioner has impersonated to appear in Sub-Inspector examination. It is also submitted that he is in custody since 25th September 2025.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner Ashok Kumar S/o Jeevanram has submitted that he has appeared as dummy for Kunal Choudhary (petitioner herein) who is also seeking bail. He also submitted that there is no proof of financial involvement as both are friends. He also referred the mention by the agency about the gift of Rs.3,00,000/- by Kunal Choudhary to petitioner. He further referred the provision under the Act of 1992 and submitted that the words as used therein clearly shows that no case against the petitioner is made out, to invoke case of unfair means. He also referred mental illness of the petitioner and submitted that the case of the present petitioner is only for appearing as a dummy on behalf of Kunal Choudhary and there is no evidence to show that the petitioner has appeared as dummy. He also submitted that petitioner is arrested on 14th December 2025 and since then he is in custody.

6. Learned Senio