The seriousness of the allegations and the impact of cheating in government exams on public trust and merit-based selection process warranted the dismissal of the bail application.

JUDGEMENT

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

1. The instant applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’) has been filed on behalf of applicant seeking grant of regular bail in case FIR bearing no. 807/2023, registered at Police Station Ranhola, New Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 420/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’).

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that the police official had received an information that certain persons were standing by a car with registration number HR ****45 near Bani Camp in Safeda Park Area, and they were involved in leaking papers of government job examination for getting a Government job taking place in Haryana.

Upon reaching the spot, the police officials had found accused Kapil and present applicant/accused Vedpal standing near the vehicle, who after seeing the police officials had run away in different directions.

Thereafter, a search was conducted of the vehicle, where the police officials had found many bags and numerous mobile phones on the rear seat of the vehicle. The bags found in the car had been checked thoroughly, and were found to contain admit cards for Haryana government job examination and other documents. It has further been alleged by the prosecution that when the accused persons Kapil and Vedpal were questioned about the aforementioned admit cards and mobile phones found in the car, they could not provide any satisfactory answer.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that the present applicant/accused has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant/accused herein is a driver by profession and has no criminal antecedent. It is argued that the only role of the applicant/accused is that he had transported the students to one computer centre as they had to take mock tests as part of his responsibility. It is further argued that the students often used to leave their bags, phones and identity cards in the applicant’s car and he was only fulfilling his duty when he was allegedly arrested. It is also stated that the present applicant/accused has no role to play in the alleged offence and it is clear from the record itself that he is only a driver who has been languishing in jail for more than three months on mere suspicion. It is stated that as per Haryana Staff Selection Commission, the exam conducting body, no question paper was leaked and no question paper was recovered from the applicant herein. It is also argued that essential ingredients of Section 420 of IPC i.e. dishonest inducement and any delivery of property cannot be made out from the facts of the present case. Therefore, the present applicant/accused is entitled to bail.

4. Per Contra, Learned APP for the State argues that the allegations against the present applicant/accused are serious and grave in nature. It is argued that the present applicant/accused was involved in the leaking of government job examination question papers in Haryana. It is further argued that several documents and mobile phones used to facilitate cheating in the examinations have been recovered from the possession of the present applicant/accused. It is also argued that candidates who have been examined by the police had stated in their statements that the present accused/applicant, along with other co-accused persons, had lured them and other candidates to give them a handsome amount of money in exchange for leaked exam papers. It is also argued that the main conspirators of the nexus, Robin and Vijay, are still absconding, and PO proceedings have been initiated against them. It is further argued that the present applicant/accused has previously been involved in another FIR under Section 294 of IPC in Rohtak, Haryana. Thus, the bail application filed by the present applicant/accused should be dismissed.

5. This Court has heard arguments addressed on behalf of learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State, and ha