SHOBHAN SINGH KHANKA versus THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Citation: [2012] 2 S.C.R. 663 · Decided: 30-03-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P. SATHASIVAM · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[?012] 2 S.C.R. 663 
SHOBHAN SINGH KHANKA 
v. 
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND 
(Criminal Appeal No. 592 of 2012) 
MARCH 30, 2012 
[P. SATHASIVAM AND J. CHELAMESWAR, JJ.] 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 
A 
8 
s.438 - Anticipatory bail - Criminal proceedings against c 
Chairman and Members of State Public Service Commission 
and Examiners regarding large scale bungling and 
manipulation of marks - Inquiry by Vigilance department - FIR 
lodged - Appellant, an Expert also arraigned as an accused 
- Application for anticipatory bail of appellant rejected by 0 
Special Judge and High Court - Held: Considering the limited 
a/legation against the appellant in the FIR and other details, 
his academic qualifications including the fact that he does not 
belong to the State and has no relatives and is not a Member 
of the JPSC, acted as Expert only for a short period, the 
appellant has made out a case for anticipatory bail - Even if E 
the prosecution has any apprehension, sub-s. (2) of s. 438 
enables the court concerned to impose such conditions/ 
directions as it may think fit - Appellant, in the event of arrest, 
directed to be released on bail, subject to the conditions 
stipulated in the judgment. 
F 
s.438 - Anticipatory bail - Factors to be considered -
Explained. 
On an inquiry conducted by the vigilance 
G 
department, it was revealed that in holding the second 
Jharkhand Public Service Commission Civil Services 
Examination - 2005, there had been large-scale bungling, 
manipulation, tampering of marks, irregularity in 
663 
H 
664 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 2 S.C.R. 
A appointment of Examiners, and the Members of the 
Interview Board end the Chairman in connivance with the 
Members and also in conspiracy with the successful 
candidates for securing monetary gains to the officials of 
JPSC, 
by 
practicing 
corrupt 
method, 
made 
B recommendations to the Government for appointment of 
various persons. It was also alleged that the Members 
either had not given declaration regarding their relatives 
appearing in the examination or had not provided the 
required details. An FIR was lodged against several 
C persons, including the Chairman and Members of the 
JPSC as also the appellant who was engaged as an 
Expert. This gave rise to Special case No. 23 of 2010 for 
offences under the IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act, 
1988. 
D 
The appellant filed an application for anticipatory bail 
E 
u/s 438 CrPC which was rejected by the Special Judge 
as also by the High Court. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. It is settled law that personal liberty is a 
precious fundamental right. While considering the claim 
of pre-arrest bail, the factors to be considered are: (i) the 
nature and gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents 
of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has 
F previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a 
Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the 
possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; and (iv) 
whether the accusation has been made with the object 
of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so 
G arrested. [para 7 and 12] [669-C; 671-C-F] 
1.2. It is not in dispute that the appellant is not a 
regular Member of the JPSC nor he belong to the State 
of Jharkhand. Admittedly, he is in Central Government 
H service and he was nominated as Expert No.1 by the 
SHOBHAN SINGH KHANKA v. STATE OF 
665 
JHARKHAND 
Board. The appellant has excellent academic career. He A 
has been a regular expert in the Selection Committees of 
UGC, AICTE, ICSSR and other Universities. He has to his 
credit the authorship of numerous Research/Reference 
Books and Textbooks. Recently, he was awarded 
"Shiksha Rattan Puraskar" by the Governor of Arunachal B 
Pradesh. The President of India based on the academic 
qualification of the appellant nominated him as her 
nominee for recruitment of Assistant/Associate 
Professors in the Faculty of Commerce and Management 
in the Indira Gandhi National Tribal University, Amar c 
Kantak, Madhya Pradesh. [para 8] [669-D-G-H; 670-A-B] 
1.3. The perusal of the FIR also shows that the 
appellant was not acquainted with or related to any of the 
candidates interviewed by the panel of which he was a 
Member. In view of the assertion that the appellant does D 
not belong to the State of Jharkhand and has no relatives, 
friends or kinsmen in the State of Jharkhand, there is no 
prima facie case to include him in the alleged conspiracy. 
Co

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.