SUMAN KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
A.B.A./9395/2019 · 2026-02-06
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9418 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9418 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:3970 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 9395 of 2019
Suman Kumar, S/o Late Raghubir Prasad Sah, R/o Rajendra Nagar Purandaha Deoghar, P.O.- Deoghar, P.S.- Deoghar, Dist.- Deoghar.
--- ---
Petitioner Versus Union of India through CBI
--- --- Opposite Party ---
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --- For the Petitioner : Mrs. Ritu Kumar, Adv. For the CBI
: Mr. Deepak Kumar Bharti, Adv.
---
24/06.02.2026 Heard Mrs. Ritu Kumar, 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 secured less marks than the candidates who even after
Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:3970 2
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.
Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that charge sheet has been submitted by the CBI on completion of the investigation. It has further been submitted that some of the co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 3349 of 2022 and its analogous cases. Mrs. Ritu Kumar has also submitted that the petitioner being successful in JET 2006, was appointed as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics in the year 2008 and he has an unblemished career. Learned counsel further adds that though the petitioner was not named in the First Information Report, but subsequently in course of investigation, his name has transpired though there being no evidence worth consideration for such implication.
5.
Mr. Deepak Kumar Bharti,
learned counsel appearing for the CBI has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and has submitted that a perusal of the charge sheet would reveal the manner in which the petitioner had gained from the manipulation caused by the JPSC officials in conspiracy with the petitioner and in such circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6.
Admittedly, chargesheet has been submitted by the CBI after completion of investigation and some of the co- accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by this court in A.B.A. No. 3349 of 2022 and its analogous cases.
Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:3970 3
7.
Regard being had to the gamut of allegations levelled against the petitioner and the aforesaid facts which reveal about submission of chargesheet by the CBI, 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 Special 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.
8.
This application stands allowed.
9.
Pending I.A.(s), if any, stands closed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
Dated- 6th February, 2026. Preet/- Uploaded on: 16 /02/2026.