[2025:RJ-JP:1551] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7403/2024 Vijay Kumar S/o Sh Dayaram, R/o Vill- Birol, Police Station Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deshraj Kalwania, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Manju Dave, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 10/01/2025 1. Apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.151/2024 registered at Police Station Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu for the offence(s) under Sections 419, 420 and 120-B of IPC and Sections 4/6 of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, the accused-petitioner has preferred this criminal misc. bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is argued that the accused-petitioner has joined the investigation as per the direction rendered by this Court vide order dated 26.11.2024. It is also argued that the accused-petitioner was unknown to the fact that in the examination conducted by Seth Gyaniram Banshidhar Poddar College Navalgarh for the course of MA/M.Sc. (Final) Geography, other person Vijay Kumar is appeared. The accused- petitioner is a Government servant in the Indian Army and he is [2025:RJ-JP:1551] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-7403/2024] ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation, custodial interrogation of the accused-petitioner is not required, therefore, the accused-petitioner may be enlarged on the anticipatory bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner and submitted the factual report. 4. The factual report shows that the accused-petitioner applied for MA/M.Sc. (Final) Geography course, examination conducted by the Seth Gyaniram Banshidhar Poddar College Navalgarh, the accused-petitioner did not appear in the examination and in his place other dummy candidate Vijay Kumar appeared in the examination. It is not denied by the accused-petitioner that he did not apply for the course, therefore, considering the grave allegations, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accused- petitioner on anticipatory bail. 5. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the accused- petitioner stands dismissed with a direction to the concerned Court that if any bail application is submitted before the Court then the same be shall decide expeditiously in accordance with law. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-12