Early Times Report
Jammu, Apr 9: In a significant development in the high-profile JKSSB paper leak case, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has refused to cancel the bail granted to two accused in the money laundering case arising out of the alleged Sub-Inspector recruitment examination leak, holding that no supervening circumstance or misuse of liberty had been shown to justify interference with the order of the Special Court.
The judgment was delivered by Justice M A Chowdhary in a petition filed by the Directorate of Enforcement seeking setting aside of the November 26, 2024 order by which Yatin Yadav and Anil Kumar Yadav were granted regular bail by the Special Judge, Anti-Corruption (CBI Cases), Jammu, designated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The Enforcement Directorate had sought cancellation of bail in connection with ECIR/JMSZO/01/2023 arising out of a CBI case linked to the JKSSB recruitment scam.
The ED argued that the Special Court had ignored the gravity of the offence, the alleged money trail of around Rs 2.52 crore, and the mandatory twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA. It was submitted that the respondents were directly involved in the leakage of the J&K Services Selection Board examination for the posts of Police Sub-Inspectors and had allegedly handled proceeds of crime generated through sale of leaked question papers.
According to the case record, the money laundering investigation stemmed from a CBI FIR registered on August 3, 2022 regarding the leakage of the JKSSB Police Sub-Inspector examination conducted on March 27, 2022. The p The High Court observed that cancellation of bail cannot be ordered in a routine or mechanical manner and requires cogent and overwhelming circumstances such as misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, threat to witnesses, evasion of justice, or violation of bail conditions. The Court noted that no such ground had been pleaded or established by the ED after the grant of bail to the respondents.
Opposing the ED plea, the respondents submitted that they had complied with all bail conditions, were regularly appearing before the trial court, and had neither violated any condition nor attempted to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. They contended that no fresh circumstance had emerged after grant of bail which could warrant its cancellation.
The High Court observed that cancellation of bail cannot be ordered in a routine or mechanical manner and requires cogent and overwhelming circumstances such as misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, threat to witnesses, evasion of justice, or violation of bail conditions. The Court noted that no such ground had been pleaded or established by the ED after the grant of bail to the respondents.
The Court further held that the Special Court had considered the material on record and the rigours of Section 45 of the PMLA while granting bail. It also noted that despite custodial interrogation, nothing had been recovered from the respondents and no post-bail conduct had been brought on record to justify cancellation of the relief already granted.
With these observations, the High Court dismissed the ED petition and upheld the bail granted to both accused, marking a setback to the agency in one of the major legal proceedings linked to the JKSSB recruitment paper leak scandal (JNF) |
