PRASHANT KUMAR, J. - (1.) ANTICIPATORY bail application filed by Petitioner Shanti Devi in connection with Vigilance Case No. 23 of 2010 ( Special Case No. 23 of 2010) pending in the court of Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi is moved by Sri. R.S. Majumdar, Sr. Advocate and opposed by Sri. T.N. Verma appearing for the Vigilance Department.
(2.) IT is alleged in the FIR that the Chairman and various members of Jharkhand Public Service Commission in connivance with different candidates had committed large scale bungling, manipulation, irregularities and had tempered the marks obtained by the candidates and thereby recommended names of their own relatives and other candidates for appointment in Government service. It is also alleged that the present Petitioner, who is a member of Jharkhand Public Service Commission, took part in the selection process knowing that her own brother and niece were appearing in the examination. It is also alleged that the Petitioner being Chairman of one of the Interview Board raised marks of different candidates by making interpolation in evaluation sheet. It is alleged that she hatched criminal conspiracy with the Chairman, other members of Jharkhand Public Service Commission and also various beneficiaries for her personal gain. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the Petitioner declared that her brother and niece were appearing in the examination and requested the Chairman for not allotting her any work , job or function in relation to examination. It is submitted that aforesaid declaration goes to show bonafide intention of Petitioner. It is further submitted that Petitioner did not perform function of evaluator of answer book nor she was member of Interview Board in which her relatives appeared. Thus the allegation of bungling, manipulation or corrupt practice against the Petitioner is baseless.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the Vigilance Department submits that there are sufficient materials in the case diary to show that the Petitioner has committed bungling in the 2nd Civil Service Examination conducted by Jharkhand Public Service Commission. It is further submitted that the Petitioner had not declared that her own brother and niece were appearing in the aforesaid examination. Thus the submission of Petitioner that she has brought the aforesaid fact in the knowledge of Chairman and requested him to keep her away from the examination process is false and has been made with a view to mislead this Court. It is further submitted that the records show that the Petitioner raised number of various candidates by making interpolation in the evaluation sheet. Accordingly, it is submitted that the present application for anticipatory bail is liable to be dismissed.;