Malpractices in competitive exams must be dealt with strictly: Gujarat High Court

Malpractices in competitive exams must be dealt with strictly, the Gujarat High Court recently said while refusing to grant anticipatory bail to a man who was booked for cheating in one such exam [Ajayraj @ Vijendrasinh Kirodilal Meena vs State of Gujarat]..Justice Hasmukh Suthar added that honest aspirants who burn the midnight oil and genuinely prepare for competitive exams for government jobs stand to lose due to such incidents. This aspect was also factored in by the judge when he rejected the plea for pre-arrest bail by a man accused of cheating in an exam for the post of clerk."In so far as the competitive examination is concerned, misconduct, misbehaviour, malpractices and cheating is required to be dealt with strictly. The purity of the examination is of paramount consideration and in the competitive exams, where many incumbent candidates burn their midnight oil to secure the government job and are eagerly waiting for the same, they are ultimately deprived due to such unscrupulous elements and their dishonest activity and malpractice," the Court's November 3 order stated. .The Court was dealing with a case where the accused was alleged to have appeared on behalf of some other person in a competitive examination for the post of clerk.The incident took place in 2014 and the investigating agency filed its chargesheet in 2016. However, the accused had been absconding since then and did not cooperate with the probe, the Court was told. The judge opined that the custodial interrogation of the accused was required in the case. .The Court reasoned further that when serious offences are disclosed and the involvement of an accused is prima facie established, the Courts should be slow to grant anticipatory bail. In this case, the Court found that prima facie, the accused had played an active role in the alleged crime, which was executed in a very planned and methodical manner. The judge commented that it was not only an offence against an individual but that it affected larger societal interests. The object of anticipatory bail, the bench went on to point out, is that a person should not be harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy the grudge or personal vendetta of a complainant. "However, in the present case, no any such sort of allegation or bias is found out. It is needless to say that order under Section 438 of CrPC is not a passport to the commission of offence nor a shield against any serious accusation, which adversely affects the society," the bench found..Therefore, the Court dismissed the plea for anticipatory bail. .Advocate HB Champavat appeared for the accused. Additional Public Prosecutor Shruti Pathak represented the State. .[Read Order]