Jharkhand High Court grants bail to beneficiary of Recruitment Scam at Jharkhand Public Service Commission, says CBI couldn’t prove how the accused manipulated the Merit List

Must Read

Plea Seeking Dream 11 to Be Declared as Betting Platform Dismissed by Rajasthan High Court

Rajasthan HC dismissed a plea that alleged Dream 11 to be a betting platform, on the assertion that the...

Federal Court Denied Involvement of US Department of Justice in Trump’s Defamation Lawsuit

Background  The Plaintiff, E .Jean Carroll, published a book where she wrote that a businessman, Donald J Trump had raped...

SC Stays Order Restraining Physical Campaigns in the Madhya Pradesh Bye-Elections

On the 26th of October, a Bench was set up which comprised Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, and...

Lawsuit Filed Against Uber for Discriminatory “Star Rating System”

The lawsuit was bought in the District Court of North California against Uber. The plaintiff claims class-action status on...

Bombay High Court To Hear Plea Seeking Removal of Chairperson of National Commission for Women

A Writ Petition had been filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the conduct of the Chairperson of the...

Bombay High Court Passes Order To Clarify and Modify Previous Order When State of Maharashtra Moved Praecipe

Division Bench of Bombay High Court consisting of Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Shrikant D. Kulkarni had passed...

Follow us

In the case of Shilpi Baxi v. UOI, the prosecution states that the accused who are the officials of the Jharkhand Public Service Commission along with the petitioner entered into a criminal conspiracy.

Further, the accused under the guidance and influence of Jharkhand Public Service Commission Officials, dishonestly and in a fraudulent manner manipulated the merit lists, assessment chart etc. of the examination/interview to extend undue benefits to their preferred candidates. It was further alleged that during the said exam/interview, the merit list was manipulated by one Dhiraj Kumar under the guidance of Jharkhand Public Service Commission officials.

JPSC officials gave undue benefits to the candidates those who were fraudulently qualified even by securing fewer marks than the candidates who were even after securing more marks could not qualify. It was alleged that the marks of the preferred candidates obtained during the interview were increased which facilitated the Selection of Lecturers. Hence, the charge sheet was submitted against the accused. The petitioner, Shilpi Baxi, had applied for the position of Lecturer in three Universities. Subsequently, she was shortlisted for the interview and after conducting an interview, she was selected for the post of Lecturer.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The Senior Learned Counsel relied upon the judgement of the cases of Siddharam Stlingappa Metre v. State of Maharashtra and Shoban Singh Khankha v. State of Jharkhand through the facts and circumstances of the case the Apex Court was pleased to give the privilege of Anticipatory bail.

The petitioner submits that the court must evaluate the entire valuable material and clearly comprehend against the accused very carefully and show to be involved in crime as per Sec 34 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The trial court has taken the cognizance of the offences and issued summons towards the petitioner which has been received by the husband of the petitioner and it has been mentioned that on what date the petitioner was to appear in the court concerned as per the summon issued to her but learned senior counsel for the petitioner on instruction submits that the petitioner was to appear in the trial court on 13.11.19 but she has not appeared before the trial court as her Anticipatory Bail Application which turned pending before the trial court, though no such document is available in the record to support such oral submission of the learned senior counsel.

The petitioner had a requisite qualification prior to the application and the investigating agency has failed to unearth the wrongdoing of the petitioner. In this regard, the opposition had failed to prove that Baxi was in connivance with JPSC officials in the criminal conspiracy.

Respondent’s Arguments

Keeping in view the serious nature of allegations against the petitioner of getting involved in a fraudulent process of recruitment conducted by co-accused member of JPSC.

Court’s Decision

The Court noted that Baxi, presently a Lecturer of Chemistry at Doranda College, Ranchi, was selected after securing 57 marks for her career and 27 marks for the interview i.e, a total of 84 marks. It was also noted by the Central Forensic Science Laboratory had deciphered that the petitioner was initially given 17 marks in the assessment chart, which was later exaggerated to 27 marks.

It was thus concluded that the petitioner deserves only 80.6 marks whereas the minimum marks required was 82.

The court noted that,

It isn’t the case of the C.B.I. that the petitioner was selected while not having requisite qualification. The allegation towards the petitioner is restricted to the marks, which had been given within the interview and which, according to the investigating agency, implicates the connivance of the petitioner. However, it was also not proved how the petitioner had manipulated her marks to secure the post of Lecturer. And as stated above, the charge-sheet has already been submitted and the petitioner is in custody since 24.2.2020.

Hence, on the above grounds, the Court granted bail to Baxi on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties of the like amount.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Plea Seeking Dream 11 to Be Declared as Betting Platform Dismissed by Rajasthan High Court

Rajasthan HC dismissed a plea that alleged Dream 11 to be a betting platform, on the assertion that the game depends on skill &...

Federal Court Denied Involvement of US Department of Justice in Trump’s Defamation Lawsuit

Background  The Plaintiff, E .Jean Carroll, published a book where she wrote that a businessman, Donald J Trump had raped her in a dressing room,...

SC Stays Order Restraining Physical Campaigns in the Madhya Pradesh Bye-Elections

On the 26th of October, a Bench was set up which comprised Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, and Justice Sanjiv Khanna. They heard...

Lawsuit Filed Against Uber for Discriminatory “Star Rating System”

The lawsuit was bought in the District Court of North California against Uber. The plaintiff claims class-action status on behalf of all the minority...

Bombay High Court To Hear Plea Seeking Removal of Chairperson of National Commission for Women

A Writ Petition had been filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the conduct of the Chairperson of the National Commission for Women. The...

Bombay High Court Passes Order To Clarify and Modify Previous Order When State of Maharashtra Moved Praecipe

Division Bench of Bombay High Court consisting of Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Shrikant D. Kulkarni had passed an Order on 25th October...

The European Court of Human Rights Orders Germany To Pay Non-Pecuniary Damages for Prison Strip-Searches 

A serving German prisoner was repeatedly stripped searched for non-legitimate purposes. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found that Germany had violated the...

Lack of Independent Witness Doesn’t Vitiate Conviction: Supreme Court

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Rajesh Dhiman v State of Himachal Pradesh clarified the law in case of lack of independent...

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -