# Roshan Singh (In Jail) v. State of U.P. & Anr. Opp. Parties

- **Citation:** (2024) 3 ILRA 1223
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2024-02-22
- **Case number:** Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 34031 of 2023
- **Bench:** Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/roshan-singh-in-jail-v-state-of-u-p-anr-opp-parties-51548
- **Pages:** 4

## Headnote

Law
-
Code
of
Criminal
Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Indian
Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 419, 420,
467, 468 & 471 - Bail Application -
Impersonation in Competitive Examination -
Societal Impact - Need for Stringent Measures

The applicant, Roshan Singh, sought bail in
Case Crime No. 531 of 2023 under Sections 419,
420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC, Police Station
Kotwali Nagar, District Banda, for allegedly
impersonating Ranjan Gupta during a Village
Development
Officer
re-examination
on
26.06.2023. The FIR, lodged by the Principal of
Arya Kanya Inter College, St.d that the
applicant's photograph and biometric fingerprint
did not match the admit card, leading to his
identification as an imposter. The applicant
argued false implication, a one-day delay in FIR,
discrepancy in arrest date (29.06.2023), the
offense being triable by a Magistrate, and parity
with others granted bail in similar cases. The
prosecution countered that the applicant was
caught impersonating, undermining meritorious
students' rights, and the parity claim was
inapplicable due to different case circumstances.
Held: The court rejected the bail application,
emphasizing the grave societal impact of
examination fraud, which jeopardizes deserving
students' futures and erodes meritocracy. The
court
urged
the
St.
Government
and
Examination Conducting Agencies to implement
stringent measures to curb such malpractices
and directed communication of the order to the
Principal Secretary (Law) and Advocate General
for
policy
formulation.
The
applicant's
involvement, the offense's severity, and the
need to deter such acts justified the denial of
bail.

Case Law Cited:

## Text

3 All. Roshan Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1223
वकया जाना है, क्योंवक वद्विीय जमानि के वलए नए आिारों की
उपलब्ििा वाांिनीय है, जो आवेिक के ववद्वान अविवक्ता द्वारा
प्रश्नगि प्रकरण में नहीं वकया गया है, इसवलए यह वद्विीय जमानि
आवेिन पत्र वनरस्ि वकये जाने योग्य है।

14. उपरोक्त के दृवष्टगि, आवेिक का यह वद्विीय जमानि
आवेिन पत्र पोर्णीय नहीं है, ििनुसार यह वद्विीय जमानि आवेिन
पत्र वनरस्ि वकया जािा है।
----------
(2024) 3 ILRA 1223
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 22.02.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI
CHAUHAN, J.

Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 34031 of 2023

Roshan Singh ...Applicant (In Jail)
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opp. Parties

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Vibhu Rai, Sri Shiv Babu Dubey

Counsel for the Opp. Parties:
G.A.

Criminal
Law
-
Code
of
Criminal
Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Indian
Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 419, 420,
467, 468 & 471 - Bail Application -
Impersonation in Competitive Examination -
Societal Impact - Need for Stringent Measures

The applicant, Roshan Singh, sought bail in
Case Crime No. 531 of 2023 under Sections 419,
420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC, Police Station
Kotwali Nagar, District Banda, for allegedly
impersonating Ranjan Gupta during a Village
Development
Officer
re-examination
on
26.06.2023. The FIR, lodged by the Principal of
Arya Kanya Inter College, St.d that the
applicant's photograph and biometric fingerprint
did not match the admit card, leading to his
identification as an imposter. The applicant
argued false implication, a one-day delay in FIR,
discrepancy in arrest date (29.06.2023), the
offense being triable by a Magistrate, and parity
with others granted bail in similar cases. The
prosecution countered that the applicant was
caught impersonating, undermining meritorious
students' rights, and the parity claim was
inapplicable due to different case circumstances.
Held: The court rejected the bail application,
emphasizing the grave societal impact of
examination fraud, which jeopardizes deserving
students' futures and erodes meritocracy. The
court
urged
the
St.
Government
and
Examination Conducting Agencies to implement
stringent measures to curb such malpractices
and directed communication of the order to the
Principal Secretary (Law) and Advocate General
for
policy
formulation.
The
applicant's
involvement, the offense's severity, and the
need to deter such acts justified the denial of
bail.

Case Law Cited:

1. Saurabh Kumar Vs St. of U.P. and Anr.,
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35731 of
2023, decided on 23.08.2023 (All. HC) (cited by
applicant, distinguished by court)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani
Chauhan, J.)

1. Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned
counsel for the applicant today in the
Court, is taken on record.

2. Heard Mr. Shiv Babu Dubey,
learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. K.P.
Pathak, learned counsel for the State and
perused the material on record.

3. The instant bail application has
been filed on behalf of the applicant,
Roshan Singh with a prayer to release him
on bail in Case Crime No. 531 of 2023,
under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471
I.P.C.,
Police
Station-Kotwali
Nagar,
District-Banda, during pendency of trial.
1224 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

4. As per the allegations in the FIR
lodged by Poonam Gupta; Principal, Arya
Kanya Inter College, Kotwali Nagar,
Banda, when the re-examination 2018 for
the post of Village Development Officer
was going on in the second meeting on
26.06.2023 at about 04:20 pm, a call was
received from the Control Room, Lucknow
regarding examination room number 4
informing that the bio-metric of one Ranjan
Gupta was found suspicious. On the
aforesaid, a team was conducted for
checking, in which the person sitting in
place of Ranjan Gupta was found to be
Roshan Singh, whose photograph and biometric fingerprint did not match with the
admit card of the original candidate Ranjan
Gupta. Information about the same was
sent to the Commission conducting the
examination, on the basis of which, an FIR
has been lodged.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that the applicant is innocent and
has been falsely implicated in the present
case due to mala fide intentions. He further
submits that the FIR has been lodged after
a delay of one day without giving any
plausible explanation for the same. The
arrest memo goes to show that the applicant
was arrested on 29.06.2023, so it cannot be
said that he was the person, who found
sitting on 26.06.2023 in the examination
centre in place of Ranjan Gupta. The
offence is triable by the Magistrate. In
different case crime numbers, in identical
matters, the number of persons have been
granted bail; one such bail application
no.35731 of 2023 (Saurabh Kumar vs.
State of U.P. and another) passed by the
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order
dated 23.08.2023, copy of which has been
passed on to the Court today, is kept on
record. Thus, the applicant is also entitled
for bail. He further submits that the
applicant has no criminal history. He is
languishing in jail since 26.06.2023. In case
he is released on bail, he will not misuse
the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the
trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted
that there is no chance of applicant fleeing
away from judicial process or tampering
with the witnesses.

6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has
opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by
contending that the applicant is named in
the FIR, but it has not been mentioned in
the FIR that the applicant was arrested on
that date. He further submits that the
applicant, who was sitting in place of
Ranjan
Gupta,
was
found
in
the
examination centre, whose photograph and
bio-metric fingerprint did not match with
the admit card of the original candidate;
Ranjan Gupta, therefore, the information of
the same was given to the Commission. On
the basis of the report of Commission, the
FIR has been lodge by the Principal of the
College, where the examination has been
conducted on 27.06.2023. He further
submits that such offence has taken away
the right of the meritorious students. The
order as placed before the Court by which
parity has been claimed, does not mention
the circumstances as in the present case and
the same is different case crime number.
Therefore, there is sufficient evidence
available on record against the applicant,
hence the applicant is not entitled for bail at
this stage.

7. Cases akin to the present one
illustrate
a
troubling
trend:
cheating
through
impersonation
in
competitive
examinations is proliferating like an
epidemic,
consequently
exerting
a
detrimental impact on both society and the
education system. The future of diligent
and deserving students is being jeopardized
3 All. Roshan Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1225
by
individuals
engaged
in
such
malfeasance, necessitating a firm and
decisive response.
These
offenders
must
be
dealt
with
sternly
to
safeguard
the
integrity
of
the
examination process and uphold the
principles of fairness and meritocracy.

8.

During
their
preparation
period,
a
student
envisions
and
nurtures their aspirations day and
night, longing for the opportunity to
achieve their dreams. However, in
today's
sorry
state
of
affairs,
responsible agencies fail to transmit
updates
in
due
course
of
time,
hindering their ability to apprehend
imposters who undermine the integrity
of the candidates.

9. Students hailing from a wide
array of socio-economic backgrounds
face myriad hurdles in their journey to
achieve their aspirations, and it is
imperative
that
we
ensure
a
transparent examination process as the
bare minimum. It would be grossly
unjust
for
this
court
to
extend
sympathy towards an imposter who
has callously subverted the right of
deserving candidates to a fair and
equitable opportunity in a transparent
examination process. Such actions not
only undermine the integrity of the
system but also erode trust in the
meritocratic principles upon which it
is founded.

10. Taking into account the
gravity of the offense, the evidence
presented, the involvement of the
accused,
the
severity
of
the
punishment, and the arguments put
forth by the learned counsel for both
parties,
I
discern
no
compelling
reason to exercise my discretion in
favor of the accused applicant.

11. Before concluding on this
matter, it is pertinent for this Court to
emphasize that it is imperative for the
State Government, in collaboration
with
Examination
Conducting
Agencies/Commissions, to introduce
robust and stringent measures aimed
at
eradicating
such
audacious
malpractices.
Such
measures
are
essential not only to instill confidence
in the state apparatus but also to
inspire every candidate investing their
most valuable years in the preparation
of competitive examinations.

12. This Court fervently hopes
and trusts that the State Government
will expedite the formulation of robust
guidelines, regulations, or policies
aimed at quelling the rampant spread
of such malpractices that have taken
root
within
our
society.
Such
guidelines, so formulated, may be
circulated among all the Examination
Conducting
Agencies/Commissions
within
the
jurisdiction
of
the
Government of Uttar Pradesh.

13.

Let
this
order
be
communicated
to
the
Principal
Secretary (Law), U.P. Lucknow who
will place it before the Hon'ble
Minister,
Law
&
Justice,
U.P.,
Lucknow.

14. In view of the observations as
made above, the bail application
stands rejected.

15. Registrar (Compliance) shall
communicate a copy of this order to
1226 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
learned
Advocate General and the
Principal Secretary (Law), U.P. Lucknow.
----------
(2024) 3 ILRA 1226
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 01.03.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

Crl. Misc. IInd Bail Cancellation Application No.
38682 of 2023

Bharat Singh ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. ...Opp. Party

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Ravikant Shukla

Counsel for the Opp. Party:
G.A., Sri Deepak Dubey

Criminal
Law
-
Code
of
Criminal
Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Indian
Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 148,
149, 302, 307, 506, 120-B - Second Bail
Application - Criminal Conspiracy - Hardened
Criminal - Exploitation of Legal Loopholes
The applicant, Bharat Singh, sought bail in Case
Crime No. 344 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148,
149, 302, 307, 506, and 120-B IPC, Police
Station Sector-Nawabad, District Jhansi, for
allegedly conspiring to murder Sanjay Verma on
21.07.2018. The FIR, lodged by Sanchit Verma,
detailed an ambush where assailants fired at
Sanjay Verma's car, killing one guard and
injuring others. The applicant, not named in the
FIR, was implicated through witness St.ments
recorded post-incident, alleging he conspired
with co-accused in 2017. The applicant argued
false implication, delayed witness St.ments,
weak
evidence,
and
over
five
years
of
incarceration, claiming "bail is the rule, jail is the
exception." The prosecution highlighted the
applicant's criminal history (27 cases, convicted
in three, including a prior murder of the victim's
brother), his family's criminal involvement, and
the rejection of a co-accused's bail by the
Supreme Court. Held: The court, citing Vinod
Kumar Vs St. of Punj. ((2015) 3 SCC 220) and
Hussain Vs Union of India ((2017) 5 SCC 702),
rejected the bail application, emphasizing the
applicant's extensive criminal history and the
case falling under the "exception" to the bail
principle due to the risk of tampering with
evidence and repeating offenses. The court
noted the societal harm caused by hardened
criminals exploiting legal loopholes, undermining
public trust, and directed the trial court to
expedite proceedings.

Case Law Cited:

1. Vinod Kumar Vs St. of Punj., (2015) 3 SCC
220

2. Hussain Vs Union of India, (2017) 5 SCC 702

(Delivered by Hon'ble Krishan Pahal, J.)

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Ravikant Shukla, learned
counsel for the applicant, Sri Deepak
Dubey, learned counsel for the informant
and Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned
A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the
material placed on record.

3. This is the second bail application
on behalf of the applicant. The first
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.27318
of 2020 has been dismissed by this Court as
not pressed vide order dated 21.02.2023.

4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime
No.344 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148,
149, 302, 307, 506 and 120-B, Police
Station Sector- Nawabad, District Jhansi,
during the pendency of trial.

PROSECUTION STORY:

5. The FIR was instituted by Sanchit
Verma, son of Shri Sanjay Verma, stating
therein that today on 21.7.2018 at about
11:00 A.M. he along with his father had
gone to Court. His father had to attend his
case in the Court of District Judge, Jhansi,