The court denied bail to a petitioner who acted as a dummy candidate in multiple public examinations, citing the recurrence of the offense and the prior dismissal of a bail application by a co-ordinate bench.

Order

1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.43/2024, registered at Police Station S.O.G., Jaipur, District A.T.S. & S.O.G. for the offence(s) under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC and Sections 3 , 4, 6, 7 and 10 of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is also contended that the petitioner is in custody since 13.06.2025, charge-sheet has already been submitted, and the beneficiary for whom the petitioner appeared in the examination conducted by the Rajasthan Staff Selection Board for the post of PTI in the year 2022 and the mediators Jagdish Saran and Ashok, have been enlarged on bail by this Court. It is also contended that the charge-sheet itself is voluminous and after filing of the charge- sheet i.e., on 04.09.2025, the trial court has not recorded the statements of any witnesses; therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that the petitioner appeared in the Village Development Officer (VDO) examination conducted by Rajasthan Staff Selection Board in the year 2021 as a dummy candidate for the beneficiary Mukesh Saran. It is also contended that the petitioner also appeared as a dummy candidate for the examination conducted for the post of 3rd Grade Teacher in the year 2022. It is further contended that the petitioner is a lecturer in the subject of History and appeared twice as a dummy candidate in various examinations conducted by various examination authorities. It is argued that the petitioner's bail application in another S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11206/2025 was dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 22.02.2026; therefore, considering the aforesaid facts, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be dismissed.

4. Heard and perused the material available on record.

5. It is apparent that the petitioner appeared as a dummy candidate in two examinations conducted by the examination authorities. The petitioner's S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11206/2025 was dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 22.02.2026. In the present case, it is alleged against the petitioner that he appeared as a dummy candidate for the main beneficiary Mukesh Saran, who have been granted bail by this Court. However, the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the other co-accused, solely on the ground that the petitioner has criminal antecedents, therefore, considering the aforesaid facts and without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

6. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands dismissed.