[2025:RJ-JP:33688] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5504/2025 Praveen Kumar S/o Gorkha Ram, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Kalu Ki Beri, Kitnoria, Police Station Dhanau, District Barmer. At Present Post As Ii Grade Teacher, Rajasthan Senior Secondary School, Itada, Dhanau, District Barmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Madhav Mitra, senior advocate with Mr. Veerendra Singh For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 22/08/2025 1. Instant application for bail is filed under Section 483 of BNSS by the applicant-accused Praveen Kumar S/o Gorkha Ram in FIR No. 74/2024 dated 25.10.2024 registered at P.S. SOG District -Jaipur ATS, whereby the applicant-accused was charged under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and 3, 6, 7 and 10 of Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2022. 2. The applicant was arrested and is in judicial custody since his arrest. The Court below has dismissed the bail application. 3. Learned Senior Advocate for petitioner submitted that on the basis of certain complaint, SOG has registered a criminal case against petitioner for impersonation and cheating while [2025:RJ-JP:33688] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-5504/2025] appearing as candidate in Senior Teacher Grade-II Competitive Exam, 2022 organized by RPSC. He further submitted that as per allegation upon petitioner, he applied as a candidate in aforementioned examination and on 24.12.2022 and 29.01.2023, instead of appearing in person, he had appeared through dummy candidate. He further submitted that on certain complaint, FIR was registered on 25.10.2024. He further submitted that during investigation, SOG has found that a dummy candidate was engaged to appear in aforementioned exam in place of petitioner but name and identity of said dummy candidate is not established by SOG during investigation. He further submitted that there is no legal evidence on record to show that this petitioner has not appeared as candidate in aforementioned exam. He also submitted that without ascertaining identity of a person, who impersonated present petitioner, filing of charge-sheet against accused is contrary to established canons of law. He also referred the investigation and submitted that petitioner has got selected in said examination and further he procured job but after complaint and investigation by SOG, service of petitioner is terminated. He also referred investigation and submitted that except evidence of police official, there is no other evidence to show that this petitioner has appeared through a dummy candidate in said examination. At last, he submitted that petitioner is in custody since 20.03.2025 and charge- sheet has already been filed. [2025:RJ-JP:33688] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-5504/2025] 4. Learned Senior Advocate has further referred judgment in case of Girdhariram Vs. State of Rajasthan (SLP (Criminal) No.7461/2025) and submitted that this is not a case of organized crime rather it is an individual case under the old provision of Public Examination Act, wherein maximum sentence is 3 years. He further referred order dated 08.08.2025 in case of Laduram Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Bail Application No.614/2025) passed by this Hon’ble Court. 5. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. She submitted report received from ATS and SOG. 6. Heard learned Senior Advocate for the applicant-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record. 7. On the basis of complaint received by SOG against petitioner for appearing as dummy candidate in Senior Teacher Grade- II Competitive Exam, 2022 organized by RPSC, the matter is investigated and during investigation, SOG has found that this petitioner has not appeared in said examination and he appeared through dummy candidate and committed offence of impersonation. As per investigation, the person who appeared as dummy candidate has not been identified but investigation is kept pending against Omprakash under Section 193(9) of BNSS. There is no allegation of engaging dummy candidate by adopting commercial means. Similarly there is no allegation of operating as an organized group or gang. [2025:RJ-JP:33688] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-5504/2025] 8. In case of Girdhariram Vs. State of Rajasthan (supra) Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted bail to the petitioner who was also charged for identical offence. In case of Laduram Vs. State of Rajasthan (supra) this court has granted bail to Laduram who was arrested on 26.11.2024 and no other person other than Laduram was found involved in the matter. 9. Upon hearing the arguments and perusing the record, we have found that the applicant-accused is no more required in the investigation and he is in custody for quite some time. The further proceedings will take its own time, therefore, looking to entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the applicant- accused. 10. Thus, the instant bail application filed on behalf of applicant- accused Praveen Kumar S/o Gorkha Ram, is hereby allowed and the applicant-accused is ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant-accused shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witness in any manner. (ii) The applicant-accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not repeat any criminal offence punishable under the Law. [2025:RJ-JP:33688] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-5504/2025] (iii) The applicant-accused shall attend the hearing of the Trial Court on the date fixed by the Trial court or as and when asked to appear before the Trial Court. (iv) In case of any violation of above conditions, the bail granted to the applicant-accused shall be liable to be canceled. 11. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Trial Court through E-mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /11