Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court recently said that the lack of criminal antecedents and the period of custody are perfectly valid criteria for granting bail to the accused. However, while giving due credence to these factors, the court cannot lose sight of the primary offence and its effect on society.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Ahsanuddin Amanullah set aside the Rajasthan High Court's order of May 8, 2024, granting bail to two persons for having compromised the sanctity of a public recruitment examination conducted by the government, i.e., the Assistant Engineer Civil (Autonomous Governance Department) Competitive Examination-2022.

The court said that in India, the reality is that there are far more aspirants for government jobs than there are vacancies. Each act, such as the one allegedly committed by the respondents, represents possible chinks in the faith of the people in public administration and the executive.

"Be that as it may, each job which has a clearly delineated entry process—with a prescribed examination and/or interview process—has only to be filled in accordance thereof. Absolute scrupulousness in the process being followed instills and further rejuvenates the faith of the public in the fact that those who are truly deserving of the positions are the ones who have deservedly been installed to such positions," the bench said.

The court concurred with the view of the trial court that the accused were not entitled to the benefit of bail, saying that since thousands of people must have appeared for the exam, the respondent-accused persons, for their own benefit, tried to compromise the sanctity of the exam, possibly affecting many candidates who had put in earnest effort in the hopes of securing a job.

"We are conscious of the fact that bail, once granted, is not to be set aside ordinarily, and we wholeheartedly endorse this view. The view taken hereinabove, however, has been taken keeping in mind the overall impact of the alleged acts of the respondent-accused and their effect on society," the bench said.

It was alleged that respondent Indraj Singh used another person, Salman Khan, to appear as a dummy candidate in his place in the examination conducted by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. The attendance sheet was allegedly tampered with, and another person’s photograph was affixed to the original admit card.

Singh was arrested on March 1, 2024, and Khan was arrested the next day, on March 2, 2024. Khan allegedly led to the recovery of a cheque amounting to Rs 10 lakh.

On March 13, 2024, the sessions court dismissed the bail plea, observing that the actions of the respondent were disruptive to the system established by law, causing significant harm to the government, administration, department, and the candidates participating in the examination. Therefore, in view of the seriousness of the allegations, bail was rejected.

On April 4, 2024, Salman Khan's bail plea was also rejected, with the court reasoning that he, along with other co-accused persons, had engaged in a criminal conspiracy for financial gain by arranging for a dummy candidate to take the exam for another person. It was also observed that there was evidence of financial transactions between respondent Salman Khan and respondent Indraj Singh.

The high court, by a common judgment, granted bail to the two accused, noting that no person had received any appointments to the position for which the exam had been held. It also observed that there was no conclusive evidence on record to show that respondent Indraj Singh had made respondent Salman Khan appear as a dummy candidate and that neither of the respondents possessed any criminal antecedents, with the investigation having been completed.

Having gone through the parameters set out by various pronouncements of this court regarding the setting aside of a bail order, the bench said, "We are of the view that the trial court had been correct in denying bail to the respondents herein. Considerations by the high court of the lack of criminal antecedents and the period of custody are perfectly valid criteria for granting bail, but the Court, while giving due credence to them, cannot lose sight of the primary offence and its effect on society."

The court allowed the appeal by the Rajasthan government and set aside the high court’s order, directing the respondents to surrender before the trial court within two weeks.

The bench, however, clarified that with the trial in progress, it would be open for the accused to apply afresh for bail before the appropriate court after the examination of material witnesses, to be decided on its own merits, accounting for all attending facts.

Case Title: The State of Rajasthan Vs Indraj Singh Etc