Court grants bail to police official in case of candidates' impersonation in constable examsPTI | New Delhi | Updated: 14-01-2021 19:39 IST | Created: 14-01-2021 19:39 IST
A court here granted bail to a Delhi Police official on Thursday in a case of alleged impersonation of candidates in the examination conducted for recruitment of constable.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Dinesh Kumar granted bail to Head Constable Vineet Kumar on furnishing a bail bond of Rs 25,000 with one surety of like amount in the case.
The court said the accused was a Delhi Police official and there was no chance of his absconding.
It further stated that investigation with respect to Vineet was already said to be complete as his custody was not required by the investigating officer. It noted that the accused's counsel had stated that his father-in-law had expired on Thursday and his wife was suffering with various ailments. “Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the offences for which the FIR has been registered, the age and social background of the accused and his family circumstances, the application is hereby allowed. Accused Vineet Kumar is admitted on bail..,” the court said in its order.
According to the FIR, Prasad forwarded a complaint on December 7, 2020, filed by one Ajit Singh, a social worker, regarding an alleged fraud in the examination for recruitment of constable in Delhi Police being conducted by the Staff Selection Commission. According to the complaint, Singh alleged that two examination centres in Muzaffarpur, Bihar, were involved in swapping of candidates with the persons resembling them to write/solve examination papers on behalf of the actual candidates.
The complainant also provided the names of two candidates, including the son of the accused, and said they had allegedly committed the fraud.
During investigation, the accused and his son were arrested.
Vineet has been booked under sections 419 (cheating by personation), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using as genuine forged document), 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code.
During the hearing, advocate Anupam S Sharma, appearing for Vineet said he was involved in secret surveillance of crime and gathering of intelligence and hence, he has incurred animosity of many bad elements. Sharma claimed the address and phone number of the complainant were found to be incorrect and the FIR was allegedly based on a complaint by some disgruntled anti-social element who does not want to reveal his identity, in order to falsely implicate the accused and his family after fabricating evidence against them. Sharma further argued that Vineet was not named in the FIR as accused and he along with his two sons were also allegedly falsely implicated in the case.
Additional Public Prosecutor Pradeep Kumar, appearing for the police, opposed the bail plea saying the case was highly sensitive in nature, as it pertained to competitive examination held for the post of Constables in Delhi Police and swapping of candidates with imposters, who wrote/solved examination papers on their behalf.
The public prosecutor alleged that Vineet had played an important role in the case and arranged the imposter candidate for his son through one Vikas Kumar Banga, who was the bridge between the candidate and the imposter candidate.
Kumar further said Vikas was absconding and deliberately and wilfully evading his arrest. He further submitted that the identity of the alleged imposter candidate was yet to be established, who was made to sit in the examination centre to do the question paper on behalf of the accused's son.
He claimed there was every possibility that if the accused was enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the evidence, hamper the investigation, alert the absconding accused persons and his associates and influence the witnesses of the case.
(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)