Vyapam Scam: Accused Gets Interim Protection From Arrest

The Supreme Court has recently granted interim protection from arrest to a man accused in the multi-crore Vyapam scam case while directing him to cooperate in the investigation.

The division bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Aravind Kumar issued notice to the Madhya Pradesh government and sought its reply to the plea.

The bench stated that “Counsel for the petitioner submits by reference to the report of the Special Task Force that insofar as the role of the petitioner is concerned, other than the memorandum by an accused, nothing has been found and the investigation is concluded and final report filed. Issue notice. In the meantime, the petitioner be not arrested but shall cooperate with the investigation, if any.”
The top court heard a plea filed by Rajesh Kumar Shrivastava challenging an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which dismissed his plea for anticipatory bail.

Therefore, Shrivastava made accused by the Special Task Force (STF), Bhopal probing the case after a complaint at the police station. STF Bhopal regarding the irregularities committed in the admission process of competition examinations by the Professional Examination Board Vyapam.

Advocate Namit Saxena, appearing for the accused, argued that the status report filed by the STF reflects that the investigation is complete but the high court while dismissing the plea for anticipatory bail directed that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required.

The plea said that “The high court, without looking into the facts and circumstances of the case and without appreciating the evidence on record, dismissed the application for anticipatory bail by the petitioner. That petitioner’s name appears only in the memorandum of the accused and absolutely nothing relevant or concrete has been produced/found against him. Even the SHO STF Police Station in its final report has clearly stated that the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offense has not been found and recommended that the case against the petitioner should be closed.”

Meera Verma

Recent Posts

Centre Opposes Ex-Judges Panel To Monitor Stubble Burning In SC

The Centre on Friday opposed a proposal in the Supreme Court to form a committee…

9 hours ago

“It’s A Celebration For Us”: Delhi HC Bar Association Felicitates CJI Sanjiv Khanna

The Delhi High Court Bar Association on Friday honored Chief Justice of India Justice Sanjiv…

9 hours ago

International Criminal Court Issues Arrest Warrant For Israeli PM Netanyahu

The International Criminal Court has recently issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,…

10 hours ago

Cal HC Stays Demolition Of Illegal Constructions In WB’s Mandarmoni

The Calcutta High Court on Friday granted an interim stay on the demolition of alleged…

10 hours ago

SC To Pass Order On Pleas To Efface Words ‘Secular’, ‘Socialist’ From Preamble

The Supreme Court on Friday announced that it would deliver its order on November 25…

11 hours ago

Air Pollution: SC Questions Delhi Govt On Truck Entry Amid GRAP-4 Restrictions

The Supreme Court raised concerns on Friday about the "drastic" consequences of the GRAP Stage…

11 hours ago