Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

21. Rakesh Kumar the Applicant in Bail Application No. 7244 of 2025, and another accused Dinesh Kumar Ram, were candidates for the CLI exam. The residence of Rakesh Kumar was also raided where several both found memorizing the leaked question paper which tallied with the official question paper. He, along with Ajit Kumar Singh, had translated the questions and the answers from English to Hindi in their own handwriting at the instance of Niraj Kumar Verma. He kept the original document containing 93 questions with answers in Hindi with himself. The original paper in the handwriting of Sushant Parashar was recovered from his residence on the basis of disclosure made by Niraj Kumar Verma. Another accused candidate Dinesh Kumar Ram was found in his company at his residence. The recordings of intercepted phone calls containing conversations of accused Rakesh Kumar and accused Dinesh Kumar Ram with accused Niraj Kumar Verma established that Dinesh Kumar Ram had gone to the residence of Rakesh Kumar as per instruction of Niraj Kumar Verma for memorizing the leaked questions and answers. 93 solved questions found in such documents seized from the residence of Rakesh Kumar tally with the questions available in the actual Test Booklet/Question Paper on which the CLI exam was supposed to be held on 04.03.2025. The candidates were supposed to attempt only 100 questions out of the total 110 questions in the actual Test Booklet / Question Paper. Thus, Investigation has established that Rakesh Kumar and Dinesh Kumar Ram had access to 93 questions out of the 100 questions that they were required to attempt during the exam.

26. The oral as well as documentary evidences, including the recordings of intercepted phone calls, collected during Investigation clearly establish that these accused candidates had given or promised to give undue advantage/ bribe in lieu of obtaining the leaked questions with answers and accused Deepak Prakash Jyoti had obtained undue advantage/bribe from such candidates on behalf of accused Niraj Kumar Verma. Further, it is also established from the recordings of intercepted phone calls containing conversation of accused Niraj Kumar Verma and accused Deepak Prakash Jyoti that accused candidate Binod Kumar Singh had delivered undue advantage / bribe to Deepak Prakash Jyoti.

27. Copies of leaked questions with answers seized from the candidates at the residence of Deepak Prakash Jyoti and Raj Marriage Lawn are the photocopies of the original Hindi translation of the leaked questions (containing 93 questions with answers) seized from the residence of accused candidate Rakesh Kumar. Niraj Kumar Verma had stricken out 08 questions in these photocopies of the leaked questions with answers thereby rendering them illegible. Hence, only 85 questions were legible in such photocopies. Thus, the said accused candidates at the residence of Deepak Prakash Jyoti and Raj Marriage Lawn were given access to 85 questions with answers out of the mandatory 100 questions to be attempted in lieu of undue advantage/ bribe. Further, the recordings of intercepted phone calls reveal accused Niraj Kumar Verma telling co-accused Ajit Kumar Singh that 85% questions were being provided. Investigation has also established that 08 questions striked out/ blacked out in the photocopy of solved question paper provided to accused candidates at the residence of Deepak Prakash Jyoti are different than the 08 questions striked out/blacked out in the photocopy of solved question paper provided to accused candidates at Raj Marriage Lawn. It is evident that this has been done to prevent the accused candidates from scoring full marks or extremely high marks in the departmental exam. This shows the modus operandi adopted by the accused persons who were taking precautions to avoid any suspicion regarding the fairness in conduction of examination.

30. The learned counsel for Sushant Parashar has further submitted that the prosecution case against this accused is based on a note allegedly written in his handwriting and certain intercepted phone calls between other accused persons. He has submitted that till date no opinion of handwriting expert of CFSL and no opinion regarding voice recognition of the intercepted calls is available so as to substantiate the allegations and the prosecution has levelled a bald allegation in the charge-sheet that the handwriting and voice of the accused persons has been identified in the presence of independent witnesses. He has submitted that no question paper has been recovered from the applicant.