B.A./9297/2026 of SUMAN SAURAV ALIAS SAURAV SUMAN Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH CID on 5 October 2026

[2026:JHHC:29740] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No.9297 of 2026

------ Suman Saurav @ Saurav Suman, aged about 27 years, Son of – Tapeshwar Kumar, Resident of – Guru Chatti, Barkagaon, P.O. + P.S. – Barkagaon, District – Hazaribagh – 825311, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

.... .... .... Opposite Party

------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate

Mr. Kishlay Kumar, Advocate

Mr. Vishal Kr. Tiwary, Advocate

For the State

: Mr. Achyut Keshav, Sr. AAG

Mr. Baibhaw Gahlaut, AC to Sr. AAG

------

Order No.02 Dated:-05-10-2026

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with C.I.D. P.S. Case No. 16 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 316(2), 316(5), 318(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 12(2), 12(3) of the Jharkhand Competitive Examination (Measures for Control and Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2023.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons, was involved in forgery, cheating, criminal breach of trust using forged documents as genuine and indulged in the organized crime of adopting unfair means and contravening the provisions of the Jharkhand Competitive Examination (Measures for Control and Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2023. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that though in the FIR, the name of the one of the accused persons has been referred to Saurav Suman but the petitioner is Suman Saurav and his alias name is Saurav Suman. It is also submitted that the alleged financial transaction of approximately Rs.15,90,000/- from the accounts of the father of the petitioner to the account of the co-accused Pawan Kumar Singh, who is the alleged to be an intermediary, does not show any direct nexus. It is further submitted that merely because the WhatsApp chat was made with the mobile phone of the petitioner, it cannot be said that the petitioner authored or operated the chats made through the WhatsApp account. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 29.07.2026 as mentioned in para- 13 of the instant bail application. It is also submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-13 of the instant bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view the direct allegation of serious nature against the petitioner of discrepancy between the candidate’s copy/carbon copy and the original OMR of the petitioner, the relevant AWS data, the Bank transactions of Rs.15,90,000/- from the bank account of the father of the petitioner to the account of co-accused Pawan Kumar Singh and the WhatsApp chats shows the involvement of the petitioner in manipulation of the whole process of the examination and because of the petitioner indulging in unfair practices in the preliminary examination for recruitment of candidates in 14th Jharkhand Public Service Commission, the same has since been cancelled because of large scale of malpractices in the same. It is next submitted that since the investigation of the case is still going on, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, keeping in view the serious nature of allegation having been made. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of indulging in unfair practices in the preliminary examination for recruitment of candidates in 14th Jharkhand Public Service Commission which has since been cancelled because of large scale of malpractices in the same as well as the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as also the chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the above named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:-05.10.2026 Saroj/