SNLo.. Dea t a roeO norp S odr f p fo ir dr g i Rd rc oi n t ee e rcs a egr e,N t c iw e u o st o dit r ri t or d te i e n ah n s es r g s r, ’ s s s

Mr. Pranav Singh, learned counsel for the Appellant.

2. Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for the CBI.

3. Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned counsel for the CBI and perused the record.

4. The present First Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant, Smt. Suman, who is in judicial custody since 28.11.2025, in connection with RC No. 0072025A0006, registered by C.B.I., A.C.B., Dehradun, for the offences punishable under Sections 238, 241 and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 12(1) and 12(2) of the Uttarakhand Competitive Examination (Measures for Control and Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2023.

5. Before approaching this Court, the Applicant had moved bail applications before the court below. As per the material placed on record, Bail Application No. 1318 of 2025 was rejected on 05.12.2025 and thereafter BA No. 79 of 2026 was also rejected by the Special Court, Anti Corruption (CBI), Dehradun, vide order dated 24.01.2026.

6. The case has its genesis in the Graduate Level Examination conducted by the Uttarakhand Subordinate Services Selection Commission on 21.09.2025. Initially, FIR No. 301 of 2025 came to be registered at Police Station Raipur, District Dehradun, under the provisions of the Uttarakhand Competitive Examination (Measures for Control and Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2023. Thereafter, the matter was taken up by the SIT and was subsequently transferred for investigation to the CBI. Upon such transfer, the CBI re-registered the matter as RC No.0072025A0006 on 27.10.2025.

7. The allegation against the Applicant is that she was one of the outside solvers in a live examination cheating arrangement. The prosecution case is that co accused Mohd. Khalid, who was inside the examination centre, caused photographs of portions of the question booklet to be transmitted through his sister Sabia to the present Applicant and that the Applicant solved the questions and returned the answers during the subsistence of the examination itself.

8. The material relied upon by the investigating agency indicates that on the morning of 21.09.2025 there was a WhatsApp exchange between Mohd. Khalid and the Applicant, wherein a request was made to the Applicant to remain available at about 11:30 AM for solving multiple choice questions relating to his sister’s examination, and the Applicant responded affirmatively. It is the specific case of the CBI that at about 11:35 AM three images containing twelve questions were transmitted to the Applicant through Sabia and that the answers thereto were sent back by about 11:45 AM.

9. The CBI further relies upon the IPDR material to contend that Mohd. Khalid, while being at the examination centre, remained engaged in an internet session through WhatsApp between 11:32:55 AM and 11:47:18 AM, with event timings corresponding to the dispatch of the questions and the receipt of solved answers. The record further reflects that at about 11:50 AM the Applicant made a voice call of 32 seconds to Sabia.

10. The record also shows that during the course of investigation one mobile phone make One Plus and a silver coloured pen drive were seized from the Applicant on 23.09.2025. Thereafter, on 25.09.2025, another mobile phone, namely Redmi