Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Kundan Kumar Pandya S/O Late Shri Dinker … vs The State Of Rajasthan … on 12 February, 2026
[2026:RJ-JP:6895]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal 2nd Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1972/2026
Kundan Kumar Pandya S/o Late Shri Dinker Pandya, Aged About 54
Years, R/o Brahmin Basti, Taamtiya, Tehsil Saagwada, Police Station
Varda, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan) At Present Grade Third Teacher,
Government Primary School, Kanyalaghata, Palwada, Dungarpur ( At
Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor.
—-Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal 2nd Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2626/2026
Swaroop Chand Meena S/o Ramkishan @ Kishan Lal, Aged About 38
Years, R/o Tikri Zafran, Police Station Mahwa, District Dausa,
Rajasthan. (Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In Central Jail
Jaipur).
—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
—-Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Harshita Sharma,
Mr. Vivek Yadav,
Mr. Tushar Sharma and
Ms. Swadha Bhargava for
Dr. Mahesh Sharma
(In SB CRLMB No. 1972/2026)
Mr. Vedant Sharma,
Mr. Shivam Sharma,
Mr. Harshit Soni and
Mr. Kartik Sharma
(In SB CRLMB No. 2626/2026)
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anurag Sharma, Special PP with
Mr. Anoop Meena and Mr. Akshat
Sharma
Mr. Saleh Mohammed, Dy.SP, SOG,
present in person
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Order
12/02/2026
1. The present bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS are filed
by the applicants-accused Kundan Kumar Pandya S/o Late
Shri Dinker Pandya and Swaroop Chand Meena S/o
(Uploaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:34:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 16/02/2026 at 08:48:19 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:6895] (2 of 6) [CRLMB-1972/2026]
Ramkishan @ Kishan Lal seeking bail in respect of a criminal
case registered as FIR No.10/2024 dated 03.03.2024 registered
at P.S. SOG District -ATS, for the offence under Sections 419,
420, 120B and 4, 5 and 6 of Rajasthan Public Examination
(Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992 and Section 66D of IT Act,
2008.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner Kundan Kumar Pandya submits that
after dismissal of bail application on 01.09.2025, almost all
accused whose bail applications were dismissed by this Court
were granted bail by Hon’ble Supreme Court. She further referred
the material against the petitioner and submitted that the
petitioner was shown as the handler, but there is no evidence to
show that the petitioner is indulged in any financial transaction in
paper leak. She also referred the identical cases wherein Hon’ble
Supreme Court has granted bail to other accused.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Swaroop Chand has
submitted that there is only one case against the petitioner and
after dismissal of SLP by Hon’ble Supreme Court, not a single
evidence has been recorded by the trial court. He further referred
bail order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Anil
Sankhala (SLP (Criminal) No. 9564/2025) and bunch of
matters, Madan Lal (SLP (Criminal) No. 14306/2025),
Rajeev Vishnoi (SLP (Criminal) No. 19089/2025), Ashok
Singh Nathawat (SLP (Criminal) No. 17786/2025) and
submitted that Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted bail to almost
all the accused who were arrested in paper leak matters. He
further referred bail order of Jagdish Vishnoi, alleged kingpin and
(Uploaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:34:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 16/02/2026 at 08:48:19 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:6895] (3 of 6) [CRLMB-1972/2026]
mastermind of paper leak, and submitted that a coordinate Bench
has granted bail on 16.01.2026.
4. Learned counsels for the parties have submitted that petitioner
Swaroop Chand is in custody since 10.03.2025 and there is one
criminal case against him, whereas Kundan Kumar Pandya is in
custody since 05.06.2025 and there is no criminal case against
him. They further submitted that the number of accused are 133,
whereas number of prosecution witnesses are 150 and it is not
possible to conclude the trial within a specific timeline. They
further submitted that the trial will take its own time and on every
date a fresh supplementary chargesheet is filed by SOG, which is
primarily reason for the delay.
5. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Special Public
Prosecutor and he submitted report received from SOG and
submitted that Kundan Kumar Pandya is close associate of Babulal
Katara, who was RPSC member and was not granted bail in
present case. He further submitted that Kundan Kumar Pandya,
has supplied to several persons and out of these persons, 9 were
selected. He further submitted that chart a prepared by them
indicate that petitioner Kundan Kumar Pandya has distributed
paper to several persons which benefited 19 candidates. He
further submitted that the SLP filed by Swaroop Chand was
dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 26.09.2025 and since
then there is no change in circumstances, thus he cannot claim
bail after dismissal of SLP by Hon’ble Supreme Court.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Special Public
Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record and also
(Uploaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:34:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 16/02/2026 at 08:48:19 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:6895] (4 of 6) [CRLMB-1972/2026]
considered the bail orders as referred by learned counsel for the
petitioners.
7. The first bail application of these petitioners was dismissed by this
Court on 01.09.2025, wherein after considering bail application of
53 accused, this Court has granted bail to 23 accused but
rejected bail application of 30 accused. Admittedly, most of 30
accused were granted bail by Hon’ble Supreme Court and some of
the orders were placed on record.
8. The details extracted from order dated 01.09.2025 are indicated
as under:-
Item Case Details Date of Role Assisgned by Criminal Antecedents
No. and CRLMB Arrest SOG
No.
1 9984/2025 05.06.2025 RPSC Connection- None.
Kundan took paper from
Kumar RPSC Member and
Pandya gave it to handlers
and family
members who got
selected.
2 9210/2025 10.03.2025 Paper Leak Gang- Case no. 42/2024 419,
Swaroop arranged the 420, 467, 468, 471,
Chand solved leaked 120B IPC and 3, 7, 10
Meena paper from Rajasthan Public
Harshwardhan Examination Act.
Meena for his son.
9. After dismissal of application on 01.09.2025, the petitioner
Swaroop Chand has approached Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing
SLP (Criminal) No. 15273/2025 and the same was dismissed on
26.09.2025. Admittedly, there is no change in any circumstance.
Learned counsel for petitioner has claimed that Harshvardhan and
son of petitioner Swaroop Chand were already enlarged on bail
and this Court has considered this fact as well, but after dismissal
of SLP on 26.09.2025, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to
(Uploaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:34:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 16/02/2026 at 08:48:19 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:6895] (5 of 6) [CRLMB-1972/2026]
the petitioner for the reasons as stated in order dated
01.09.2025.
10. The material on record indicated that after dismissal of bail
application of Kundan Kumar Pandya by this Court on the ground
that he was one of the mastermind working with Sandeep and
Purushottam in procuring paper from Babulal Katara and Vijay
Kumar, relative of Babulal, and further distribution to other
candidates. Sandeep Kumar was granted bail by Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Criminal Appeal No. 4984/2025 on 21.11.2025, but bail
application of Purushottam was dismissed.
11. The chart to show involvement of present petitioner as submitted
by learned Special Public Prosecutor is reproduced as under:
ckcwyky dVkjk ¼vkj-ih-,l-lh- lnL;½
│
dqUnu dqekj ik.M;k
────────────────────────────────────
│ │ │ │ │
lUnhi ykVk Lo;a ds cPps jktdqekj ;kno cqf)lkxj mik/;k; jkgqy dVkjk (SIP)
¼,,vks½ ¼fjf)] uSfrd] usgk½ ¼gSM dkfu-½ ¼ch-bZ-vks-½
¼vH;FkhZ½vkfnR; mik/;k;(SIP)
───────────────────
│ │ │
lR;sUnz flag ;kno (SIP) Hkjr ;kno¼vH;FkhZ½ jfoUnz lSuh(SIP)─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
│ │ │ │ │ │jfoUnz flag¼vH;FkhZ½ fotsUnz dqekj tks’kh(SIP) iq:”kksÙke nk/khp¼,,vks½ euh”k nk/khp jkds’k lSuh Hkokuh
¼vH;FkhZ½ ¼vH;FkhZ½ ‘kekZ¼vH;FkhZ½
│
f’koflag¼dkfu-½
│
lqjsUnz cxfM+;k (SIP)───────────────────────────────────────────────────
│ │ │ │ │
jsuq dqekjh(SIP) jkf/kdk flag¼vH;FkhZ½ ukxs’k dqekj ;kno¼,,vks½ izoh.k [kjkM+h(SIP) vkjrh ‘kekZ¼vH;FkhZ½(Uploaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:34:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 16/02/2026 at 08:48:19 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:6895] (6 of 6) [CRLMB-1972/2026]│
lqjthr flag ;kno (SIP)
12. Having considered the grounds raised herein and the orders
passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in respect to other accused,
this Court is of considered view that this is not a fit case to
enlarge petitioners on bail, as matter relates to paper leak of
public examination.
13. In case of Zeba Khan vs. State of U.P. reported as 2026
INSC 144, Hon’ble Supreme Court has allowed a criminal appeal
filed against grant of bail by the High Court of Judicature at
Allahabad where the accused Mazhar Khan was charged for
offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471
IPC.
14. Considering the gravity of allegations and overall facts and
circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to dismiss the bail
application of the applicant accused at this stage.
15. Accordingly, the applications for bail filed under Section 483 of
BNSS preferred by Kundan Kumar Pandya S/o Late Shri
Dinker Pandya and Swaroop Chand Meena S/o Ramkishan
@ Kishan Lal are hereby dismissed.
16. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and record all
material witnesses as early as possible.
(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J
PREETI VALECHA /22-23
(Uploaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:34:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 16/02/2026 at 08:48:20 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)