SC: Compromising exam sanctity 'chinks' faith in public administration, executive

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has set aside the bail of two men accused of using a dummy candidate in a public recruitment examination saying the offence "chinks" faith of the people in the public administration and the executive.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Ahsanuddin Amanullah allowed the appeal filed by the state government challenging the bail order by the Rajasthan High Court. "We are conscious of the fact that bail once granted is not to be set aside ordinarily, and we wholeheartedly endorse this view. The view taken hereinabove, however, has been taken keeping in view the overall impact of the alleged acts of the respondent-accused and its effect on society," the bench said.

The court said in reality there were far more government job takers than available jobs in India. The FIR alleged that one Indraj Singh compromised the sanctity of the Assistant Engineer Civil (Autonomous Governance Department) Competitive Examination, 2022 as a "dummy candidate" on his behalf appeared for the exam.

Attendance sheet was allegedly tampered

The attendance sheet was allegedly tampered with, and the fake candidate's photograph was affixed to the original admit card. The top court, in its order dated March 7, directed the accused to surrender before the court concerned in two weeks.

Each job filling required adhering to the prescribed entry examination or interview process, it added. "Absolute scrupulousness in the process being followed instills and further rejuvenates the faith of the public in the fact that those who are truly deserving of the positions, are the ones who have deservedly been installed to such positions. Each act, such as the one allegedly committed by the respondents represent possible chinks in the faith of the people in the public administration and the executive," the bench said.

Accused compromised exam sanctity

The top court said the accused tried to compromise the sanctity of the exam for their own benefit, affecting several aspirants who put in an earnest effort to appear in the exam with the hopes of securing a job.

Agreeing with the trial court that the men did not deserve bail, the court said, "It is also true that every person has a presumption of innocence working in their favour till and such time the offence they are charged with, stands proved beyond reasonable doubt." The top court, therefore, observed the men should "stand trial" for it be "established by the process of law" that they were innocent.