[2026:RJ-JP:2991] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 16146/2025 Purushottam Dadhich S/o Mahaveer Prasad Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Sagu Chhoti, Post Sagu Kalan, Police Station Khunkhuna, District Deedwana Kuchaman, At Present Under Suspension Assistant Accounts Officer First, Office Of Joint Director, Medical And Health Department, Udaipur. (Presently Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 16145/2025 Rajendra Kumar Yadav @ Raju S/o Shri Tejpal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Tadawas, Police Station Kalodara, Jaipur Rural, District Jaipur. (Presently Prisoner Central Jail, Ghatgate, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Jain and Mr. Prince Pal Singh in Bail Application No. 16146/2025 Mr. Jitendra Choudhary in Bail Application No. 16145/2025 For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anurag Sharma, Spl. PP with Mr. Anoop Meena Mr. Saleh Mohammed, I.O. (SOG), present in person HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 21/01/2026 1. The present 2nd bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicants-accused Purushottam Dadhich S/o [2026:RJ-JP:2991] (2 of 6) [CRLMB-16146/2025] Mahaveer Prasad Sharma and Rajendra Kumar Yadav @ Raju S/o Shri Tejpal seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.10/2024 dated 03.03.2024 registered at P.S. Special Police Station (SOG) Jaipur District – ATS & SOG, for the offence under Sections 419, 420 and 120-B of IPC and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of Rajasthan Public Examination (Use of Unfair Means) Act, 1992 (for short ‘the Act of 1992’) and Section 66-D of IT Act. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against them is complete and they are no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicants accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. He also submits that the applicants undertake not to repeat offence and cooperate with trial, which will take time. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner accused-Purushottam Dadhich submits that the allegation against the present petitioner is that the petitioner is having acquaintance with Kundan Kumar Pandey and Sandeep Kumar Lata, who had complicity with Babulal Katara and the paper was made available to the petitioner. He further submits that allegation clearly indicate that the present petitioner has procured paper from Sandeep Kumar Lata and further distributed to other persons. He further submits that Sandeep Kumar Lata has been granted bail, despite having a serious charge than petitioner. He also submits that even other persons like Radhika Singh and Praveen Kumar were [2026:RJ-JP:2991] (3 of 6) [CRLMB-16146/2025] also granted bail. He further referred order in case of Rinku Kumar Sharma and submits that several persons allegedly involved in network, were also granted bail. He further submits that very recently on 16.01.2026 Jagdish Vishnoi, who is allegedly kingpin or mastermind, was granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court. He further submits that the present petitioner is in custody for the offence charged under the Act of 1992 wherein maximum punishment is of three years. He further submits that the allegation upon the present petitioner is not proved from any material collected during investigation and trial will take time as there are 133 accused and more than 150 witnesses making trial impossible. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner- Rajendra Kumar Yadav @ Raju also submits that the matter pertains to offence under the Act of 1992 wherein the maximum punishment is three years and the petitioner is in custody for last more than a year. He also referred the order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court and by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and submitted that even the persons charged with graver acts were granted bail. He further submits that the case of the present petitioner is better than those who were granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court or by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court. 5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail applications and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. He has also filed a report [2026:RJ-JP:2991] (4 of 6) [CRLMB-16146/2025] received from Police Station Special Police Station (SOG) Jaipur District – ATS & SOG. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Special Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties. 7. First bail applications of both these petitioners were dismissed by this Court on 01.09.2025. The material on record indicate that Rajendra Kumar Yadav @ Raju has alleged arranged meeting between Jagdish Vishnoi (mastermind and one of kingpin) with Rajesh Kandelwal (Examination Centre In-charge) for paper leak. The allegation also included selling paper through a network. One more criminal case No.5/2020 under the Rajasthan Examination Act was registered against Rajendra Kumar Yadav @ Raju. 8. After dismissal of bail application by this Court on 01.09.2025, the petitioner Rajendra Kumar Yadav @ Raju has approached Hon’ble Supreme Court and filed a SLP (Criminal) No.15147/2025 and on 25.09.2025, the SLP was dismissed. After dismissal of SLP, current bail application is filed by the petitioner Rajendra Kumar Yadav @ Raju. 9. The allegation against petitioner Purushottam Dadhich is that he worked as accomplish of Sandeep Kumar Lata and distributed examination paper to his connections Renu Kumari, Radhika Singh, Surjeet Yadav, Praveen Kumar, Manish Dadich and others. Out of these Radhika Singh and Arti Sharma were unsuccessful in Physical Eligibility Test (PET/PST) whereas Manish Dadich was unsuccessful in [2026:RJ-JP:2991] (5 of 6) [CRLMB-16146/2025] interview but Renu Kumari, Surjeet Yadav and Praveen Kumar got selected as Sub Inspector. 10. The orders submitted by learned counsels indicate that Rinku Kumar Sharma and Rajesh Khandelwal were granted bail by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 05.12.2025 whereas Ashok Singh Nathawat was granted bail on 05.01.2026. 11. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has granted bail to Kailash Kumar, Manglaram, Parmesh Choudhary and Vinod Kumar Jat on 08.01.2026. Radhika Singh and Shiv Singh were granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 04.11.2025. Praveen Kumar Kharadi were granted bail on 16.01.2026 after considering that Bhagirath Vishnoi was granted bail by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 16.09.2025. The alleged mastermind or kingpin Jagdish Vishnoi was granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench on 16.01.2026 after considering that Rajesh Khandelwal was granted bail by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 05.12.2025 on the ground that there are 150 witness and 133 accused. Also considering that 57 accused were released on bail and the petitioner accused is custody since 06.03.2024. 12. Having considered the entirety, facts and circumstances of the case and also the material placed on record and also considering the order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court and Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, I am of considered view that the matter pertains to direct recruitment of Sub Inspectors in Police and the material indicate that there was not only a widespread leak of examination papers but also the entire process was compromised in a manner that [2026:RJ-JP:2991] (6 of 6) [CRLMB-16146/2025] anyone having money or other resource, was able to manipulate or influence the examination. 13. The involvement of the petitioners Purushottam Dadhich and Rajendra Kumar Yadav @ Raju clearly indicate that their act is of very serious nature and even if the applicant-accused Purushottam Dadhich is in custody from 02.06.2025 and Rajendra Kumar Yadav @ Raju is in custody since 06.03.2024, the petitioners are not entitled to be released on bail. 14. The facts and the material indicate that the alleged offence are of serious nature and role attributed to applicants are prima facie sufficient to consider complicity of applicants in the crime. Therefore, at this juncture, considering the evidence collected so far, this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants accused on bail. 15. Considering the gravity of allegations and overall facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to dismiss the bail applications of the applicants accused at this stage. 16. Accordingly, these 2nd application for bail filed under Section 483 of BNSS preferred by the applicants-accused Purushottam Dadhich S/o Mahaveer Prasad Sharma and Rajendra Kumar Yadav @ Raju S/o Shri Tejpal is hereby dismissed. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MR/32-33