SC rejects bail plea of RAS officer Hanumana Ram in paper leak case

Jaipur: The Supreme Court Wednesday rejected the bail application of Hanuman Ram, a Rajasthan Administrative Service (RAS) officer arrested for his alleged role in the 2021 Sub-Inspector Recruitment Exam.The SC refused relief after hearing opposition from the counsel of state govt. It noted the gravity of allegations and material on record, especially the accusation that Ram acted as a dummy candidate for three persons.In April 2025, the Special Operations Group (SOG) of Rajasthan Police had arrested RAS officer for his alleged involvement in an impersonation racket linked to the SI exam. Appearing in the court, S D Sanjay, solicitor general of India and additional advocate general Shiv Mangal Sharma, argued in the court that if petitioner has been appointed as RAS officer, he would have sold the state, and therefore not entitled for bail.A division bench of SC comprising Justice Deepankar Dutta and Justice Satish Chand Sharma after considering the seriousness of allegations and material placed on record, declined to grant bail, observing that the conduct of the accused particularly when he appeared as dummy candidate for three persons, and the nature of the offence did not warrant any indulgence at this stage, said Sharma.Ram, though a meritorious candidate, having secured 22 rank in RAS exam 2018 was allegedly involved in a larger conspiracy of examination fraud and appeared as dummy candidates, the state govt argued.The state highlighted that the accused had appeared as a dummy candidate in multiple examinations, including Sub-Inspector Recruitment Examination, 2021 (for different candidates on separate dates), and Patwar Recruitment Examination, 2021.It was brought to the notice of the court that the accused was not initially named in the FIR, but his involvement surfaced during investigation, indicating a deeper and organised role in the examination racket.Opposing the bail, the counsel of state govt strongly contended that such acts strike at the very root of public administration and integrity of competitive examinations. It was argued that a person selected and appointed to a responsible post like RAS, if found indulging in such activities, poses a serious threat to the system and, in such circumstances, no leniency should be shown.The Court also took note of the fact that the accused had allegedly appeared in multiple examinations as a proxy candidate, demonstrating a pattern of conduct rather than an isolated incident.