Assam PSC Recruitment Scam: Gauhati High Court Grants Bail To Suspended ACS Officer Citing Non-Compliance Of S.41A CrPC

The Gauhati High Court on Saturday granted bail to suspended ACS officer Rakesh Das, accused of using illegal means to increase his marks by inserting fake answer script in Combine Competitive Examination 2013, conducted by Assam Public Service Commission (APSC).

The single judge bench of Justice Robin Phukan observed that in the present case, the provision of Section 41A of CrPC has not been complied with before causing arrest of the accused.

Das had moved the bail application under Section 439 of CrPC in connection with a case registered against him under Sections 7, 13(1)(a)(b)(d)(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) read with section 120B, 420 of the IPC and added sections 463, 468, 471, 477(A), 201 of the IPC on the basis of an FIR lodged by Dr. Anshumita Gogoi, on October 27, 2016.

It was alleged by the informant that one Nabakanta Patir has contacted her and asked her to pay sum of Rs.10,00,000/- for recruiting her in a post of Dental Surgeon, conducted by APSC and while she came to Dibrugarh to hand over aforementioned sum then Police caught him red handed.

The allegation against the present accused was that in Combine Competitive Examination 2013 (CCE), conducted by APSC, he had used illegal means to increase his marks by inserting fake answer script.

The Counsel appearing for the accused-applicant submitted that at the time of arrest of the accused, the Investigating Officer (I.O.) has not given him any notice as mandated by section 41A CrPC and as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Satinder Kumar Antil v. CBI & Another (2022) 10 SCC 51.

It was further submitted that though the case has been registered under the above-mentioned provisions of the PC Act, yet the same are not applicable in the present case in as much as at the relevant point of time i.e. in the year 2013, the accused was not a public servant.

It was also argued that two co-accused have already been granted bail by the High Court and therefore, maintaining parity with the said accused persons, the applicant should also be granted bail.

On the other hand, the APP, Assam submitted that the provisions of PC Act are very much applicable in the case, as the accused was involved in the conspiracy of bribing a public servant and the punishment prescribed for the same are more than 7 years and therefore I.O. has not given any notice under section 41A CrPC and that the I.O. has collected sufficient materials and submitted charge sheet against the accused.

The Court noted that the accused has obtained job of Assam Government by adopting unlawful means in collusion with arrested accused Rakesh Kumar Paul and other officials of APSC. It observed,

“Admittedly, here in this case the provision of section 41A Cr.P.C. has not been complied with before causing arrest of the accused. The learned Addl. P.P. having obtained necessary instruction as regard the compliance of the provision of aforesaid section had appraised the court that the same was not complied with as the case was registered under sections 7/13(1)(a)(b)(d)(2) of the P.C. Act, also apart from sections under IPC.”

It was further noted by the Court that the amended provisions of the PC Act came in to force with effect from 2018, by which the punishment prescribed in some provisions have been enhanced. However, the occurrence took place in the year 2013, and at that time the old provision of the Act was in force where punishment prescribed was up to 7 years, and as such, there is requirement of compliance of the provision of section 41A CrPC. as held by Supreme Court in the case of Satinder Kumar Antil (supra).

“Also it appears that the accused has been languishing in jail hazoot since 30.11.2023. Investigation of the case has also been completed and charge sheet has already been submitted before the learned court below. Moreover, two co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 25.01.2024, in BA No. 113 of 2024, and vide order dated 25.01.2024, in BA No. 83 of 2024. As held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satinder Kumar Antil (supra) persons accused with same offence shall never be treated differently either by the same court or by different courts,” the Court said.

Thus, the Court granted bail to the accused-applicant on furnishing a bond of Rs.50,000/- only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, Assam.

Case Title: Rakesh Das v. The State of Assam

Case No.: Bail Appln./233/2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order