The main legal point established is that the application of judicial mind is essential in taking cognizance, and the allegations must prima facie constitute an offence.

JUDGMENT :

In all these cases, common questions of fact and law have arisen and that’s why all these matters have been heard together with the consent of the parties.

2. All these matters were decided by the judgment dated 13.12.2021, whereby the entire criminal proceedings were quashed. This order dated 13.12.2021 was challenged by the State of Jharkhand before the Hon’ble Supreme court in Criminal Appeal No. 2659 of 2023 [arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 8591 of 2022] and its analogous cases and by judgment dated 01.09.2023, the Hon’ble Supreme court was pleased to set aside the said order and remanded the matter to this court to decide the case afresh. Pursuant to that the said matters were assigned by Hon’ble the Chief Justice of this court to this Bench and that is how these matters were posted before this Bench and thereafter the matters were posted on 11.10.2023, 16.10.2023 and 01.11.2023 and today these matters were fixed for final disposal with the consent of the parties.

3. Heard Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in all these cases, Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned A.P.P., Mr. V.S. Sahay, learned A.P.P. and Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State in respective cases.

4. In all these cases, prayers are made for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance and analogous cases dated 15.01.2018, by which, cognizance for the offence under Sections 406, 409, 418, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Jharkhand Conduct of Examination Act, 2001 has been taken against the petitioners, in connection with Daltonganj Town P.S. Case No. 382 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No. 2536 of 2017, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau.

5. The FIR was lodged alleging therein that the Deputy Collector (Establishment) has lodged the First Information Report alleging therein that on 05.11.2017 an examination for appointment of 4th grade was conducted at 26 different centres and thereafter a committee consisting four members was made for counselling. It has been further alleged that on 12.11.2017, 31 candidates out of 34 selected candidates appeared before the committee for their counselling. It is further alleged that the informant received information regarding irregularities in said examination from different areas. It has further been alleged that on the day of counselling after verification of certificates a written test was conducted in such test 50 question was asked in which 16 questions were same as was asked on 05.11.2017 and rest 34 questions were similar. Thereafter all answer sheets were examined by the committees in which it was noticed that 30 candidates out of 31 candidates obtained very low marks than the marks obtained in the examination held on 05.11.2017. It is further alleged that the candidates could not give answer to the question asked by the counselling team and further it has been alleged that the candidates who have been selected have obtained more marks in the examination held on 05.11.2017 by committing mischief.

6. In Criminal Appeal No. 2659 of 2023 [arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 8591 of 2022] and its analogous cases, the Hon’ble Supreme Court by judgment dated 01.09.2023 has passed the following order:-

“ Leave granted.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. These appeals have been filed by the appellant aggrieved against the impugned order dated 13.12.2021 passed by the High Court of and analogous cases Jharkhand at Ranchi in Cr.M.P. No.1079/2018 by which the First Information Report registered against the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 418, 420, 120B of the IPC read with Sections 3 & 4 of the Jharkhand Conduct of Examination Act, 1981 is set aside.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the investigation made reveals that the question papers were leaked in the first examination conducted for Class IV employees whic