CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Dr. Arun Kumar Sinha vs CBI <BR> Manoj Kumar Vs State

Patna High Court · Decided on 13 January 2005 · Citation: (2005) 2 PLJR 492

HON’BLE JUDGES
Narayan Roy, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 120B, 380, 409, 420 · Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(1)(c)(d), 13(2)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No''s. 39993 and 35479 of 2004
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 353 words

Narayan Roy, J.—Heard counsel for the parties. Both these applications since arise out of common first information report, they are being disposed of by this order.

2.

These are the applications for grant of regular bail on behalf of the petitioners in a case under Sections 120B, 420, 380 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

3.

It is alleged that the accused persons including the petitioners used to leak out question papers for Medical Entrance Examination pertaining to CBSE, PMT and PDT 2003 in due connivance and they used to make delivery of leaked question papers in lieu of heavy amount.

4.

In course of investigation, materials surfaced that these petitioners in conspiracy with other accused persons were arranging for question papers to the candidates and the investigating agency found that the leaked questions with answers were used to be faxed to accused Arun Kumar Sinha at Nagpur, whereas it used to be received by accused Manoj Kumar at Patna.

5.

It appears that prayer of accused Manoj Kumar, who is petitioner in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 35479 of 2004 had earlier moved this Court for grant of regular bail in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 4723 of 2004 and his prayer for grant of regular bail was rejected by this Court by speaking order.

6.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners remained in custody for about a year and there is no direct material to show that these petitioners, in fact, used to leak out the question papers. It is further submitted that merely because the petitioners had nexus with the main accused, Ranjit, they should not be allowed to remain in custody.

7.

It appears from the materials collected in course of investigation that the genuine students were deprived, whereas the candidates, who had no potential, succeeded in getting admission in Medical Courses on the basis of leaked question papers.

8.

It appears to be a crime against the society; and as such, in my opinion, the petitioners do not deserve bail. Accordingly, these applications are dismissed.