‘Leaking competitive exams question paper more heinous than murder’; Chhattisgarh HC rejects former Chhattisgarh PSC Chair Taman Singh Sonwani’s bail plea

“A person who indulges in facilitating leakage of question paper relating to competitive examinations, plays with the career and future of lakhs of young aspirants, who are ‘burning the midnight oil’ to prepare for competitive exams. Such an act is more heinous than an offence of murder because by killing a person, only one family gets affected but by ruining the career of lakhs of aspirants whole society is adversely impacted.”

Chhattisgarh High Court

Chhattisgarh High Court: In a bail application filed by Taman Singh Sonwani (‘Taman’), former chairman of Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission (‘CPSC’) against his arrest under Sections 120B1 and 4202 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Sections 7, 7(A) & 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (‘PC Act’) for allegedly leaking question papers of the State Service Examination (‘the exam’), a Single Judge Bench of Bibhu Datta Guru, J., rejected the application, holding that the case was not fit for grant of bail. The Court remarked that the alleged charges levelled against the accused persons, including Taman could by no stretch of the imagination, be termed as ordinary charges.

Background

Taman was the chairman of CPSC, and from 2020-2022 he conducted the exam. The allegations against him were that he, along with other officials of the CPSC, gave undue advantage to their respective family members. During the investigation, it was revealed that Taman’s co-accused gave Rs. 45 Lakhs under the head of Corporate Social Responsibility (‘CSR’) to an NGO named Gramin Vikas Samiti (‘GVS’), whose chairperson and secretary were Taman’s wife and brother, respectively. Thereafter, the question papers for the exam were leaked to the aforementioned co-accused, who in turn forwarded them to two other accused. Based on this, two of the accused succeeded in the examination and were selected for the post of Deputy Collector. The question papers were also provided to Taman’s nephews, who got selected in the exam for the posts of Deputy Collector and Deputy Superintendent of Police, respectively.

Thus, two FIRs were registered, and Taman was arrested. Aggrieved, he filed the present bail application.

Analysis

The Court noted that from a bare perusal of the charge sheet and the statement of Taman’s brother, it was quite clear that Taman’s wife, brother, and nephew were the Chairperson, Secretary, and Member, respectively, of GVS. In the name of GVS, they obtained financial approval from the CSR and Board of Directors of Bajrang Power and Ispat Ltd (‘Bajrang Power’), and thereafter, the same was siphoned to Taman’s family members before the preliminary and final examination of CPSC. For the said financial help, under Taman’s instruction, his co-accused leaked the question papers to other accused, two of whom were Taman’s brother’s nephews and two were the son and daughter-in-law of the Director of Bajrang Power.

The Court reiterated that a person who indulges in facilitating leakage of question papers relating to competitive examinations plays with the career and future of lakhs of young aspirants who were ‘burning the midnight oil’ to prepare for competitive exams. Such an act is more heinous than an offence of murder because by killing a person, only one family gets affected, but by ruining the career of lakhs of aspirants, the whole society is adversely impacted. Therefore, the Court remarked that the alleged charges levelled against the accused persons including Taman, could by no stretch of the imagination, be termed as ordinary charges. Taman’s action was a clear example of ‘fence eating the crop’.

After considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case particularly, the seriousness of allegations levelled against Taman, the statement of his brother categorically admitting the leak, the selection of four of the co-accused pursuant to the leak, rejection of the bail application of three co-accused, and continuance of the investigation in respect of other involved persons according to Central Bureau of Investigation, the Court stated that prima facie, the present case was not fit for grant of bail to the accused.

Thus, the Court rejected the bail application.

[Taman Singh Sonwani v. Central Bureau of Investigation, MCRC No. 2496 of 2025, decided on 22-04-2025]


Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the applicant: Senior Advocate Shri Fouzia Mirza and Ali Afjal Mirza

For the respondent: B. Gopa Kumar and Himanshu Pandey

Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE

penal code, 1860


1. Section 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

2. Section 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *