Haryana judicial exam paper leak: Delhi High Court junks judicial officer’s plea challenging charges against him

The Delhi High Court recently dismissed a suspended judicial officer’s petition challenging charges framed against him in a case involving allegations of a leak of the question paper in the Haryana Civil Services (Judicial Branch) preliminary examination, 2017 [Dr Balwinder Kumar Sharma v. State of UT Chandigarh]..Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma observed that the case against the suspended judicial officer Dr. Balwinder Kumar Sharma was of "a very sensitive nature" and that there was evidence to indicate that he was in possession of the question paper immediately before the alleged leak..Balwinder Kumar Sharma was the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s Registrar (Recruitment) when the alleged leak took place. He was placed under suspension by the High Court soon after the case became public.On December 14, the Delhi High Court opined that in cases where digital or electronic evidence is available, the case of prosecution cannot be thrown at the initial stage. It, therefore, dismissed Sharma's petition challenging the charges framed against him in the case. “The case is of a very sensitive nature and the evidence which is required to be led for the purpose of proving the case is either digital or documentary in nature,” the Court added..In 2017, Balwinder Kumar Sharma, a judicial officer from Punjab, was accused of leaking the question paper to some candidates. After canceling the examination, the Punjab and Haryana High Court handed over the probe to a Special Investigation Team. Sharma later approached the Delhi High Court in 2022, challenging an order passed by an Additional Sessions Judge in Chandigarh in January 2020. The order in question framed charges against Sharma under various provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code.Meanwhile, the Supreme Court transferred the trial in the case to Delhi in 2021..The Delhi High Court noted that the prosecution case against Sharma was that he was in constant touch with a co-accused, Sunita and that the same was backed by the call details of their “alleged known and ‘secret’ phone numbers.”Sharma had allegedly given a copy of the paper to Sunita. She then allegedly offered it to one Sushila and asked her to carry out a negotiation with another candidate Suman for the money to be paid.Suman later blew the lid on the alleged paper leak when she approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court with a petition, eventually leading to a case being filed against Sharma as well. .Before the High Court, Sharma argued that the trial court had not given any reason for concluding that a prima facie case had been made out against him. He also contended that there was no evidence in the case and that Sunita’s disclosure statement to police could not be read against him.The High Court, however, reasoned that at the stage of charge, the Court is only required to see whether there is a prima facie case and consider the broad probabilities. It also pointed out that in cases of criminal conspiracy, it is hardly possible that there would be any direct evidence of the crime. .“The jurisdiction of the Court while entertaining the revision petition is also very limited, the Court can interfere in the challenged order or only if there is any serious illegality, infirmity or perversity in the order of the learned trial court,” the Court added.Finding no illegality in the order passed by the trial court, the High Court proceeded to dismiss Sharma's petition. .Advocates Alok Bhachawat, Jeeva Nandan and Anmol Gupta represented petitioner, Dr. Balwinder Kumar Sharma.Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Charanjeet Singh Bakhshi represented the Union Territory of Chandigarh with APP Amit Sahni..[Read Judgment]