1 CGHC010217102026 2026:CGHC:29177 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5109 of 2026 Venu Janghel S/o Harishchandra Janghel Aged About 19 Years R/o Ward No. 1, House No. 55, Village Bortara, Tehsil And Police Station- Saja, District- Bemetara (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- City Kotwali, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajnish Singh Baghel, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Dr. Sourabh Kumar Pande, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 130/2026 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 316 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (for short ‘BNS’) and under Sections 4, 5, 10 of Chhattisgarh Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2008. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Shri Virendra Kumar Raj, In-charge Registration Officer, Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education, lodged a written complaint on 16.03.2026 at Police Station City Kotwali alleging that information had been received through social media platforms, particularly WhatsApp, and various newspaper reports published on 15.03.2026 and 16.03.2026 regarding the leakage of the Class XII Hindi examination question paper prior to the scheduled examination. It is alleged that a handwritten version of the Hindi question paper was circulated on social media during the intervening night of 13.03.2026 and 14.03.2026 at about 2:41 a.m. through a WhatsApp group allegedly operated by one Ikra under the name “Genius Academy.” Upon comparison, the investigating agency found similarities between the viral handwritten questions and the official B-Set Hindi question paper. On the basis of the said complaint, Crime No. 130/2026 was registered against unknown persons at Police Station City Kotwali for offences punishable under Sections 10, 4 and 5 of the Chhattisgarh Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2008 and Section 316 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During the course of investigation, mobile phones, digital records and electronic communications were examined, and it was alleged that certain persons had entered into a criminal conspiracy for obtaining and circulating the confidential examination paper before the examination. Relying upon the statements of co-accused persons and electronic evidence collected during investigation, the present applicant along with co-accused person were alleged to 3 have been connected with the transmission and circulation of the leaked question paper. Consequently, the applicant along with co- accused were arrested during the investigation and remanded to judicial custody. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and that no direct evidence is available to establish his involvement in the alleged leakage or circulation of the Class XII Hindi examination question paper. It is contended that the prosecution case substantially rests upon the memorandum statements and disclosures allegedly made by co-accused persons, which by themselves do not constitute substantive evidence against the applicant. He further submits that no leaked question paper, incriminating document, electronic device, or any other material connecting the applicant with the alleged offence has been recovered from his possession. It is argued that the applicant was neither an administrator nor a member of the WhatsApp group through which the question paper was allegedly circulated and that there is no evidence to show that he either received, transmitted, or forwarded any confidential examination material. It is further submitted that the mere presence of the applicant’s name, mobile number, or contact details in electronic records, without any proof of active participation in the alleged conspiracy, is insufficient to establish criminal liability. He also disputes the prosecution’s allegation that the applicant was absconding, submitting that the applicant was residing at his usual place of residence, attending his 4 college classes regularly till 26.05.2026, and continuing with his normal activities. It is pointed out that the applicant had accompanied his father for opening a bank account and that his family had even approached the college authorities regarding his attendance records, thereby demonstrating that he was neither concealing himself nor evading the investigation. It is further submitted that no notice was ever served upon the applicant requiring his participation in the investigation and, therefore, the allegation of abscondence is wholly misconceived. He also submits that the charge-sheet has beel submitted before the competent Court and the applicant has been in jail since 06.05.2026 and that no further custodial interrogation is required. The applicant is a young student aged about 19 years, pursuing B.Sc. (Second Semester) at Shri Shankaracharya Mahavidyalaya, Bhilai, actively preparing for competitive examinations including recruitment conducted by the Railway Recruitment Board, and has participated in NCC activities and State-level sports competitions, reflecting his disciplined conduct and good character. It is contended that continued incarceration at this formative stage would seriously prejudice his education, career prospects, and future development. Learned counsel further submits that the principal accused are different persons and the applicant has been made a scapegoat during the investigation despite the absence of cogent material against him. Therefore, considering the applicant’s age, educational background, clean antecedents, cooperation with the investigation, and the lack of direct evidence connecting him with the alleged 5 offence, it is prayed that he be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature as they relate to the leakage and circulation of a confidential public examination question paper, thereby affecting the fairness, integrity, and credibility of the public examination system. It is contended that during the course of investigation, electronic evidence, digital records, mobile phone data, and the statements of co-accused persons revealed the applicant’s involvement in the transmission and circulation of the leaked question paper. He further submits that the investigation has disclosed a well-organized conspiracy involving several persons and that the role of the applicant cannot be viewed in isolation at this stage. It is argued that the absence of recovery from the applicant or his status as a student does not by itself absolve him of criminal liability when there is other material collected during investigation indicating his participation in the alleged offence. The contention regarding false implication, lack of direct evidence, and the evidentiary value of the statements relied upon by the prosecution are matters to be examined during trial and cannot be conclusively adjudicated at the stage of consideration of bail. It is further submitted that offences involving leakage of examination papers have far-reaching consequences on society and adversely affect the careers and legitimate expectations of thousands of 6 students. Considering the gravity of the offence, the nature of the evidence collected during investigation, and the possibility of the applicant influencing witnesses or tampering with electronic evidence connected with the case, no case for grant of bail is made out. Therefore, it is prayed that the present bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence that though the allegation against the present applicant is that, in connection with the leakage of the Class XII Hindi examination question paper prior to the examination, he was allegedly involved in a criminal conspiracy relating to the transmission and circulation of the leaked question paper through electronic means and social media platforms, and on the basis of electronic evidence and statements of co-accused persons collected during investigation, he was arrested, but also considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent, he is in jail since 06.05.2026, and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, and conclusion of the trial may take some time, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant- Venu Janghel, involved in Crime No. 130/2026 7 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 316 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Sections 4, 5, 10 of Chhattisgarh Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2008, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 8 (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan