Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:3934 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 8304 of 2019 Dhiraj Kumar, S/o Late Raghunath Saran Sinha, R/o Madhukam Gali, Opp. Panchtarni Mandir, Ratu Road, P.O.- Hehal, P.S.- Sukhdeonagar, Dist.- Ranchi. --- --- Petitioner Versus The Union of India through CBI, Ranchi --- --- Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Adv. For the CBI : Mr. Deepak Kumar Bharti, Adv. --- 17/06.02.2026 Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Deepak Kumar Bharti, learned counsel appearing for the CBI. 2. In this application, the petitioner has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail as he is apprehending his arrest in connection with R.C. Case No. 4(A)/2013-R registered for the offences under Sections 120B read with 201/420/468/471 IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 3. The prosecution case reveals that the accused public servants along with a private person, i.e., Dhiraj Kumar (petitioner) of M/s Global Informatics had entered into a criminal conspiracy amongst themselves and in furtherance of the same, the public servants in strict abuse of their respective official positions dishonestly and fraudulently manipulated/allowed to manipulate the merit list assessment charts. It has further been alleged that during JET 2006, the merit list was manipulated by Dhiraj Kumar under the guidance and influence of JPSC officials in order to extend undue benefits to certain candidates who were dishonestly and fraudulently declared qualified even though they had Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:3934 2 secured less marks than the candidates who even after securing more marks, could not qualify. It has also been alleged that marks in the assessment charts of a number of candidates obtained during interview were increased to extend undue favor to them which facilitated their selection as lecturers. 4. It has been submitted by Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was neither a member of the Interview Board nor did he participate in the interview proceedings. The petitioner has been implicated merely on account of the fact that the pre and post examination works of JET 2006 was carried out by the petitioner. It has been stated that the petitioner has been charge-sheeted in a similar case being RC-06(A)/2013, in which he has been granted anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 2110 of 2016. In the present case also, chargesheet has been submitted and several co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 3349 of 2022 and its analogous cases vide order dated 19.04.2023. 5. Mr. Deepak Kumar Bharti, learned counsel for the CBI has submitted that the petitioner was directly involved in the examination process and worked under the direct control of the Chairman of JPSC and its Members as well as the Controller of Examinations. The chargesheet depicts in details the role played by the petitioner in the entire transaction. 6. The petitioner has been arrayed as (A-3) in the charge sheet submitted by the CBI and it appears from the perusal of the same that in some instances, the marks foil signed by the Evaluators and the Coordinators mentioning the marks scored by the candidates were received by the petitioner which is in clear disregard of the laid down procedure which states that the sealed packets of answer books was to be Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:3934 3 received by the JPSC in the immediate supervision of the Controller of Examinations, JPSC. It has also been mentioned therein that the merit list was prepared by the petitioner in conspiracy with the other public servants of JPSC which accommodated the undeserving candidates at the cost of deserving candidates. 7. The petitioner seems to have been implicated on account of the procedure of receiving of sealed packets having not been followed and the petitioner is said to have conspired with the JPSC officials in the entire episode of manipulating the marks. Admittedly, chargesheet has been submitted by the CBI and as noted above, some of the co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 3349 of 2022. 8. On consideration of the aforesaid facts, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned trial court within a period of four weeks, and on his surrender, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.J.C.-XVI-Cum- Spl. Judge, CBI, Ranchi in connection with R.C. Case No. 4(A)/2013-R, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 9. This application stands allowed. 10. Pending I.A.(s), if any, stands closed. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) Dated- 6th February, 2026. Preet/- Uploaded on: 16 /02/2026.