[2025:RJ-JP:21631] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3060/2025 Purushottam Dadhich S/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Sagu Choti Vaya Sagu Badi, Police Station Khunkhana, District Deedwana- Kuchaman (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP 2. Niyaj Mohammad Khan, Dy.S.P., SOG, Jaipur, Special Police Station (SOG), ATS And SOG ( Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aladeen Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anurag Sharma, Spl. P.P. with Ms. Shreya Hakila Mr. Shakeel Ahmed Khan,Dy. S.P. SOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 22/05/2025 Present petition is filed seeking quashing of FIR No. 10/2024 dated 03.03.2024 lodged with the Police Station Special Police Station (SOG) District ATS & SOG (Raj.) for the offences under Section 419, 420, 120B IPC and Section 4,5,6 of the Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992 and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amended) Act, 2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that an FIR against the petitioner is lodged with false and fabricated story. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a government employee, who was employed for approximately 14 years at remote place in Udaipur. The petitioner has already filed an application before the [2025:RJ-JP:21631] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-3060/2025] concerned Court on 08.04.2025 assuring that he shall co-operate in the investigation, therefore, allegation qua absconding is untrue. Further, the petitioner has refuted the allegations leveled against him in the charge sheet also. Furthermore, it is submitted that name of the petitioner is not reflected in the FIR. Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor has submitted that as per the factual report dated 21.05.2025, petitioner is alleged of selling question papers of a public examination @ Rs. 15 Lacs, prior to 4-5 days of the examination in collusion with his colleague Nagesh Yadav. It is further submitted that one lady Renu Kumari, who was a successful candidate has specifically stated that the petitioner has provided answer-sheets/solved paper to her. It is further submitted that the petitioner is absconding from a prolonged period and a reward was also published in the newspaper qua him. Learned Special Public Prosecutor has submitted that fact of filing a surrender application is an attempt to misrepresent the Court. Moreover, no copy of the said application was ever served to the respondent- State. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, taking note of the fact that offence committed by the petitioner is crime against the society and falls under the ambit of serious offences. Further, the said inaction of the petitioner cannot be given free hand by this Court, specially when the petitioner has approached this Court with unclean hands. Additionally, as enormous resources of the State and manpower is utilized while conducting examinations on such a [2025:RJ-JP:21631] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-3060/2025] large scale, therefore, investigation is required in such offences and same cannot be interfered by this Court. Taking note of the aforementioned, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the present petition and same is dismissed with a cost of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) being imposed on the petitioner, which is to be deposited with the respondent- SOG, within an upper limit of 15 working days, from the date of passing of this order. It is made clear, if aforementioned direction of the Court is not complied with within the stipulated time period, respondent -State is at liberty to attach and issue proclamation orders qua the properties registered in name of the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed with aforementioned cost. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J Pooja /61