HC ‘no’ to anticipatory bail to Vyapam accused

Source: The Hitavada      Date: 05 Jul 2017 11:11:46


Legal Correspondent

A DIVISION bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court comprising Chief Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla has dismissed anticipatory bail application filed by Anand Kumar seeking anticipatory bail for crime registered against applicant at Gopalganj Police Station, Sagar district, for offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC, Section 3(d)/(2)/4 of MP Manyata Prapt Pariksha Adhiniyam 1937.

The division bench said that it does not find that any case is made out to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. The present application being devoid of merit, is dismissed accordingly. Allegation against the applicant is that CBI is now investigating the matter and that the applicant has impersonated one Manish Rajpu in MBBS entrance examination.

The question as to whether the applicant has impersonated and the related issues need investigation as it was a fraudulent conduct in examination with connivance of officers/officials of Madhya Prdaesh Professional Examination Board (Vyapam). Counsel for the applicant referred to, two orders passed by this court in case (Swati Sonwani versus State of MP), wherein the applicant was a girl and admitted to anticipatory bail on July 2, 2013, and in other case, a candidate was admitted to anticipatory bail on August 8, 2013, in another case (Brijendra Singh Rajput versus State of MP) to claim parity in the matter of grant of anticipatory bail.

The division bench in its order said that it finds that such cases were in respect of grant of anticipatory bail prior to judgement of Apex Court in the case of Nidhi Kaim and another versus State of MP, wherein it has been held that the fraud committed in the examination process will vitiate the entire admission.

Since, allegation is of impersonation, the question as to how and why the applicant impersonated Manish Rajput is a matter of investigation. It does not find that any case is made out to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. The application being devoid of merit, is dismissed, division bench said.