O R D E R

By way of this petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 41 of 2022, dated 05.05.2022, registered at Police Station Gaggal, District Kangra, under Section

420 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

2. When this case was listed 20.05.2022, the following order was passed:-

“As prayed for, list on 23.05.2022, to enable the State to have instructions. It is made clear that no anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner by the Court at this stage.”

3. Today, learned Additional Advocate General has handed over a copy of the status report, which is ordered to be taken on record.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the matter. According to him, only because one accused namely Shri Gaurav Kumar has alleged that he has been shown solved question papers at Thakur Kanshi Ram Web Solution Centre, Gaggal, which is an online examination centre for various examinations being managed by the petitioner, he stands falsely implicated. Learned Counsel has submitted that the petitioner being the Manager of the said Web Solution Centre had not indulged in any illegal activity. He has further submitted that whereas the Web Solution Centre of the petitioner was an authorized examination Centre for online examinations, however, the written examination for recruitment of Police Constables in Himachal Pradesh was held offline and holding of the written examination for recruitment of Police Constables has nothing to do with Thakur Kanshi Ram Web Solution Centre, Gaggal, of the petitioner. He has also submitted that the petitioner was not even present at Gaggal on the fateful day and the petitioner came to know only from newspapers that persons stood arrested in the case in issue and he apprehends that the investigating agency, has falsely implicated persons like the petitioner in order to give clean chit to the police officers, whose involvement in the scandal cannot be ruled out. Accordingly, on these bases, learned Counsel has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the accused and has stated that, if released on bail, the petitioner will comply with all the conditions that may be imposed. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs.

State of Maharashtra and Others (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases

694.

5. Opposing the petition, learned Additional Advocate General by placing reliance upon the status report has submitted that the investigation which has been carried out so far has clearly indicated the involvement of the petitioner with the commission of the crime. He has argued that as per investigation, the petitioner received cash from five candidates in lieu of his making question paper available to said candidates. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that investigation has clearly pointed out towards receipt of the amount by the petitioner from the parents of the candidates. Learned Additional Advocate General also argued that as the investigation is at a very very initial stage and the involvement of the petitioner in the case is writ large, therefore, release of the petitioner at this stage would create impediments in the course of fair investigation, as custodial interrogation of the petitioner was required to find out as to how and who actually leaked the paper in issue. He also argued that the State is interested in discerning the truth, and in this regard, no laxity was being exercised in favour of anyone. He accordingly prayed for dismissal of the bail petition.

6. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and also gone through the petition as well as the status report carefully.

7. A perusal of the status report demonstrates that days before the written examination for recruitment as Police Constables in Himachal Pradesh was to take place, on 27.03.202