Facilitating Question Paper Leak In Competitive Exam More Heinous Than Murder: Jammu & Kashmir HC Refuses Bail To BSF Officer In SI-Recruitment Scam

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court on Wednesday rejected the bail application of a BSF officer, alleged to be the main accused in the J&K Service Selection Board Police sub-inspector recruitment scam case observing that grant of bail in economic offences which affect a larger section of the society on the mere fact that the offence with which an accused is charged does not carry a very severe punishment does not by itself create a ground to enlarge the accused on bail.A bench comprising Justice Sanjay Dhar, while rejecting the bail application of the accused, a Border Security Force (BSF) Commandant (Medical), observed, "A person, who indulges in facilitating leakage and sale of question papers relating to competitive examinations, plays with the career and future of thousands of young aspirants. Such an act is more heinous than an offence of murder because by killing a person only one family gets affected but by ruining the career of thousands of aspirants, whole society is adversely impacted". In his plea for bail the applicant had submitted that he has been wrongly and falsely implicated in the aforesaid criminal case by the CBI, that he is a Doctor by profession holding the post of CMO/Commandant Medical in the Border Security Force, having unblemished service career to his credit.The petitioner further submitted that investigation is complete in the matter as the charge sheet stands already filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu and on this ground, he urged that the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.After examining the charge sheet Justice Dhar observed that it is true that the charge sheet has already been laid before the Magistrate but in the charge sheet, it is clearly mentioned that further investigation to unearth larger conspiracy, to trace proceeds of crime, to establish role of other accused persons and to probe other allegations levelled in the FIR is underway and hence the contention of the senior counsel for the petitioner that investigation in the case is complete, cannot be accepted. Declining to agree with the contention of the petitioner that he was “wrongly and false implicated” in the case, Justice Dhar pointed towards another FIR related to the question paper leak of the finance accounts assistant examination conducted by the JKSSB and the role of the petitioner that has surfaced in the same. “Not only this, even the report of the enquiry committee set up by the government is damning against the petitioner. In the report, it has been noted that the petitioner had managed to induct several candidates in the BSF against financial consideration and that he had advertised secretly that he would help prospective candidates in passing the medical tests,” the court said.Highlighting the contents of the Government Enquiry report that point towards the close links that the petitioner enjoys with some high and mighty politicians, Justice Dhar recorded, “In the face of the propensity of the petitioner to indulge in similar types of offences, it may not be appropriate to enlarge him on bail at this stage when the investigation relating to the larger conspiracy of question paper leakage of sub-inspector posts is still underway,”. Elaborating further on the bail plea the bench observed that the charges levelled against the petitioner can by no stretch of imagination be termed as ordinary charges. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail,” the court underscored. “The economic offence having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds needs to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country,” Justice Dhar reasoned. In view of the same the bench dismissed the bail application and directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to complete further probe in the case and file a supplementary charge-sheet, if any, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months.Case Title: Karnail Singh Vs UT of J&K Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 57Click Here To Read/Download Order

Facilitating Question Paper Leak In Competitive Exam More Heinous Than Murder: Jammu & Kashmir HC Refuses Bail To BSF Officer In SI-Recruitment Scam

Basit Amin Makhdoomi

Tags