Candidates Burn Midnight Oil To Secure Govt Jobs, Malpractices In Competitive Exams Has To Be Dealt With Strictly: Gujarat HC

A bench of Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar observed thus while denying anticipatory bail to one Ajayraj Meena who has been accused of appearing in the competitive examination for the post of Clerk on behalf of the co-accused (Udayraj Brijlal Meena) by creating forged documents.

“In so far the competitive examination is concerned, misconduct, misbehaviour, malpractices and cheating is required to be dealt with strictly. The purity of the examination is of paramount consideration and in the competitive examination where many incumbent candidates burn their midnight oil to secure the government job and are eagerly waiting for the government jobs, they are ultimately deprived due to such unscrupulous elements and their dishonest activity and malpractice,” the Court remarked as it found it not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the accused.

Taking into account the investigation papers, the Court noted that the alleged offence was committed in the year 2014 and the FIR and charge sheet in the case was filed in the year 2016, however, the applicant has been absconding to date i.e. since last more than 7 years.

The Court also noted that prima facie it appeared that the accused has played an active role and qualitative investigation is necessary in the matter.

The Court also opined that when serious offences are disclosed and involvement of an accused is prima facie established then, the Court would be loath to lean in favour of grant of pre-arrest bail in the absence of any other overriding considerations.

“…this court is of considered view that, the present offence is committed very smartly and in very planned and methodical manner which is not just an offence against any individual rather the largest societal interest and in such circumstances, the delicate balance is required to be maintained between two rights one against the personal liberty and second is societal interest. Arrest is part of the process of investigation and intended to secure several purposes in which the accused may provide information, during the discovery of material facts and relevant information,” the Court said.

Consequently, the Court observed that in such circumstances, when the investigation is at the preliminary stage if, anticipatory bail is granted, it may hamper the investigation and therefore, to find out the involvement of other persons, custodial interrogation is also necessary.

Against this backdrop, having considered the nature and seriousness of the charge, prima facie involvement of the accused and the possibility of tampering with evidence, the Court denied him the benefit of anticipatory bail.