Gratuity Is a Property Right, Not a Charity: MP High Court Upholds Gratuity Claims of Long-Term Contract Workers Seized Vehicles Must Not Be Left to Rot in Open Yards: Madras High Court Invokes Article 21, Orders Release of Vehicle Seized in Illegal Quarrying Case Even After Talaq And A Settlement, A Divorced Muslim Woman Can Claim Maintenance Under Section 125 CRPC: Kerala High Court Bail Cannot Be Withheld as Punishment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail to Govt Official in ₹200 Cr. Scholarship Scam Citing Delay and Article 21 Violation Custodial Interrogation Necessary in Serious Economic Offences: Delhi High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail in ₹1.91 Cr Housing Scam Specific Relief Act | Readiness and Willingness Must Be Real and Continuous — Plaintiffs Cannot Withhold Funds and Blame the Seller: Bombay High Court Even If Claim Is Styled Under Section 163A, It Can Be Treated Under Section 166 If Negligence Is Pleaded And Higher Compensation Is Claimed: Supreme Court When Cheating Flows from One Criminal Conspiracy, the Law Does Not Demand 1852 FIRs: Supreme Court Upholds Single FIR in Multi-Crore Cheating Case Initiating Multiple FIRs on Same Facts is Impermissible: Supreme Court Quashes Parallel FIRs and Grants Bail Protection in Refund Case Not Every Middleman Is a Trafficker: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail in International Cyber Trafficking Case, Cites Absence of Mens Rea Stay in One Corner Freezes the Whole Map: Madras High Court Upholds Validity of Decades-Old Land Acquisition Despite 11-Year Delay in Award Parole Once Granted Cannot Be Made Illusory by Imposing Impossible Conditions: Rajasthan High Court Declares Mechanical Surety Requirement for Indigent Convicts Unconstitutional Once Acquisition Is Complete, Title Disputes Fall Outside Civil Court Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Appeal Lies Against Lok Adalat Compromise Decree Even on Grounds of Fraud: Orissa High Court Declares First Appeal Not Maintainable Sanction to Prosecute Under UAPA Cannot Be a Mechanical Act: Supreme Court Quashes Jharkhand Government’s Third-Time Sanction Without New Evidence FIRs in Corruption Cases Cannot Be Quashed on Hyper-Technical Grounds of Police Station Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Restores ACB Investigations Quashed by Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Completion of Ayurvedic Nursing Training Does Not Confer Right to Appointment: Supreme Court Rejects Legitimate Expectation Claim by Trainees University’s Error Can’t Cost a Student Her Future: Supreme Court Directs Manav Bharti University to Issue Withheld Degree and Marksheets Due to Clerical Mistake Disciplinary Exoneration Cannot Shield Public Servant from Criminal Trial in Corruption Cases: Supreme Court Customs Tariff Act | ‘End Use’ and ‘Common Parlance’ Tests Cannot Override Statutory Context: Supreme Court Classifies Mushroom Shelves as ‘Aluminium Structures’ Supreme Court Allows PIL Against Limited Maternity Benefits for Adoptive Mothers to Continue Under New Social Security Code Liberty Cannot Wait for Endless Trials: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Wadhawan Brothers in ₹57,000 Crore DHFL Scam Co-Sharer Has Superior Right of Pre-emption Even If Land Is Gair Mumkin Bara: Punjab & Haryana High Court Neighbours Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 498A IPC Merely For Alleged Instigation: Karnataka High Court No Party Has a Right to Demand a Local Commissioner — It's Purely the Court’s Discretion: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Civil Revision

P&H High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Alleged Cyber-Criminal in Police Sub Inspectors’ Exam Scam

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of Mr. Gurmeet Singh, who was allegedly involved in a massive examination scam related to the recruitment of Police Sub Inspectors in the State of Punjab. The judgment was pronounced on July 21, 2023, by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara.

The accused, Mr. Gurmeet Singh, was apprehended on charges of facilitating the online examination scam by hacking the examination center and remotely solving question papers. The scam involved providing undue advantage to certain candidates in exchange for large sums of money.

The court emphasized the seriousness of the offense and the potential consequences of allowing cyber-criminals involved in such crimes to evade custodial interrogation. It stressed the importance of stringent action against cyber-thugs to safeguard sensitive matters like police recruitments and prevent future breaches.

“The evidence collected so far points out the petitioner’s involvement... Given the nature of allegations, custodial interrogation is required. An analysis of the allegations and evidence collected does not warrant the grant of bail to the petitioner.”

The court’s decision came after examining the evidence presented by the police, which included communication records and transactions linking the petitioner to the offense. The court also considered the ongoing investigation, which aims to uncover the involvement of other individuals in the recruitment scam.

The judgment also highlighted the vulnerability of examination systems and the usage of breach-able and unsafe software, calling for fool-proof and secure software to prevent misuse of artificial intelligence by hackers.

“This scam has not only impaired but also derailed a highly sensitive and essential recruitment in the police... There can be no leniency while dealing with bail petitions of cyber-thugs in the matters of cyber-crime.”

The court’s decision reflects its commitment to maintaining the integrity of the recruitment process and the importance of apprehending cyber-criminals involved in such sensitive matters. The judgment serves as a reminder that cyber-crime needs to be dealt with stringently to prevent further breaches in the future.

The court clarified that its observations in the judgment should not be considered as expressions of opinion on the case’s merits and that the trial court should not refer to these comments.

“Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case’s merits, neither the court taking up regular bail nor the trial Court shall advert to these comments.”

The dismissal of the anticipatory bail plea indicates that the accused, Mr. Gurmeet Singh, will now have to face custodial interrogation and further legal proceedings in the case.                                        

Date of Decision: 21.07.2023                                                    

Gurmeet Singh  vs State of Punjab   

Latest Legal News