Kumar Yuvraj v. Central Bureau Of Investigation Through The Asp, C.B.I, E- 0111, Delhi, New Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70027 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2024 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Patna ====================================================== Kumar Yuvraj S/o Law Kumar R/o - 22 / 2A Gandhi Nagar Baidkaro Paschimi Gankre Bokaro, P.S - Gandhi Nagar, District - Bokaro (Jharkhand) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation through the ASP, C.B.I, E- 0111, Delhi, New Delhi New Delhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kr Singh No.1, Adv.
:
Mr. Udit N. Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dr. K.N. Singh(A.S.G.) For the CBI :
Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 10-10-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned senior counsel for C.B.I.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Shastri Nagar PS case no. 358 of 2024 dated 05.05.2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 407, 408, 409, 120 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, the case was taken over by the C.B.I. and re-registered as RC No. 221/ 2024/ (E) 0006 on 23.06.2024 under Sections 120-B r/w Sections 407, 408, 409 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. This is the second attempt for grant of regular bail on behalf of the petitioner inasmuch as earlier, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court, vide order, dated 27.03.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 16162 of 2025.
2/6
4. The prosecution case, as per the allegation made in the First Information Report, is that the informant, Inspectorcum- SHO of Shastrinagar Police Station, Patna, on 05.05.2024, during patrolling, got the information from his senior officials that in the NEET UG Examination, 2024, an organized gang, having some students along with staffs, in collusion, has breached the integrity and sanctity of the chain of custody of question papers and leaked the same. Name of the petitioner transpired during investigation.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the First Information Report does not disclose any specific role of the petitioner in breaching the chain of custody of the question papers and no incriminating material at all, has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that it is not the case of the prosecution that the petitioner was caught, while cheating or using unfair means during the NEET Examination or was involved in stealing the question paper. Learned counsel next submits that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR and his name transpired in the present case on the basis of statement made by one of the coaccused during the course of investigation.
6. The investigation has revealed that accused-
3/6 petitioner got close connection with Pankaj Kumar and he was also known to Amit Kumar (nephew of Pankaj Kumar). Accused-petitioner got involved in the scheme of things on 3rd May 2024 when Amit Kumar told him to go to the flat of Pankaj Kumar at Bokaro and after getting the instructions, he went to Bokaro on 04.05.2024. It has further come into light that accused-petitioner took the candidates to the flat of Pankaj Kumar. Investigation further revealed that when the solved question paper could not be printed from the printer kept at the flat of Pankaj Kumar, one of the accused namely Sudip Kumar sent the solved question paper to the one-plus mobile phone of accused-petitioner who in turn went to the Digital Computer Zone about 500 meters away from the flat to get the print out and after some time, the accused-petitioner came back with four sets of print out of solved question papers of Chemistry and Physics which was then distributed to the candidates present at the flat. An amount of Rs. 360/- was paid by the accusedpetitioner for xerox expenses through his phone pay account.
7. He further submits that charge sheet has already been submitted and cognizance has been taken by the competent court. The petitioner is in custody since 27.08.2024 and keeping him in custody any further would not serve any purpose.
4/6
8. Learned counsel further submits that there is no likelihood that the petitioner will abscond or tamper with the evidence and the main conspirator namely Pankaj Kumar has been granted bail in Cr. Misc. No. 9546 of 2025 vide order dated 15.05.2025 along with several co-accused persons in Cr. Misc. No. 65810 of 2024 vide order dated 09.04.2025, Cr. Misc. No. 85644 of 2024 vide order dated 04.07.2025, Cr. Misc. No. 21258 of 2025 vide order dated 08.08.2025, Cr. Misc. No. 85615 of 2024 vide order dated 19.03.2025 and Cr. Misc. No. 74464 of 2024 vide order dated 09.04.2025.
9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that charge is serious in nature having larger societal ramifications and therefore he may not be granted the privilege of bail.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the materials available on record. The investigation is completed and final form (charge-sheet) has already been submitted by the C.B.I. in the Court. This Court has been informed by learned counsel for the C.B.I. that cognizance of offence against the petitioner has already been taken. The petitioner is in custody since 27.08.2024 i.e., for 1
5/6 year & 45 days and detaining him further in custody is not going to serve any purpose. Similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. There is no likelihood that the petitioner will abscond or tamper with the evidence. The trial is not likely to be concluded in near future due to several witnesses, documents and articles which are yet to be examined and this is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail, accordingly, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
11. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Magistrate, CBI, Patna, in connection with Shastri Nagar Police Station Case No. 358 of 2024, taken over by the Central Bureau of Investigation and reregistered as RC No. 221/2024/ (E) 0006 on 23.06.2024, subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner who shall give genealogy as to how he is related to the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Trial Court on each and every date,
6/6 failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled. (iii) The petitioner shall not intimidate and/or influence the witnesses by inducement, fraud or promise (iv) The petitioner shall not leave the territory of India without permission of the Court and shall hand over the passport, if any to the C.B.I.
(v) The Petitioner shall co-operate with the further investigation of C.B.I. if any and shall make himself available as and when required by the Investigating agency.
12. It is made clear that if the petitioner violates any of the condition made upon him, the CBI is at liberty to approach this Hon'ble Court for cancellation of bail. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) harshpandey/- U