Interim Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: CC No. CBI/13/2025
RC-220 2024 E0006
CBI vs. Deepanshu Choudhary & Ors.
12.02.2026
Present: Sh. Arjun Anand, Ld. PP for the CBI.
IO/ASP Bikash Chandra Chourasia, CBI, EO-II,
New Delhi in person.
Matter is listed today for consideration on the
charge-sheet.
IO has filed CFSL report alongwith certain
documents. Same are taken on record.
IO has also filed amended list of witnesses and list
of documents. Same are also taken on record.
Submissions on cognizance by IO as well as Ld. PP
heard.
The present matter pertains to cheating by
impersonation and forgery by appearing in National Eligibility
cum Entrance Test (NEET) conducted for admission in various
medical courses in various government and private Medical
Colleges throughout India for 12th passed out students. In order to
qualify the NEET Examination, those who were less meritorious
connived with certain persons whom were already pursuing their
medical courses from different Medical Colleges to appear on
their behalf as a real candidate in lieu of monetary consideration
and there are certain middleman to arrange the dummy
candidates to appear in examination on behalf of real candidate.
In the present case, accused Abhishek appeared as
dummy candidate on behalf of accused Deepanshu Choudhary
who was the real candidate. Similarly, accused Rohitash Puniya
-- 1 of 3 --
appeared as dummy candidate on behalf of accused Bhanu Pratap
who was the real candidate. Similarly, accused Ram Chandra
appeared as dummy candidate on behalf of accused Mohd. Ayan
who was the real candidate.
Investigation also revealed that Khursheed Alam
approached accused Veer Bhan, father of accused Deepanshu
Choudhary who agreed to pay an amount of Rs. 50,000/- as
advance for arranging dummy candidate for his son in NEET
Examination. On instructions of accused Kailash Kala,
Khursheed Alam arranged cash amount of Rs. 4 lakhs to be paid
as advance payment to accused persons Abhishek, Ram Chandra
and Rohitash Puniya and handed over the said amount to accused
Mukesh Jhakar. Khursheed Alam had collected Rs. 1.7 lakhs
from accused Bhudev Singh, father of accused Bhanu Pratap, Rs.
1.5 lakh from accused Naseem Ahmad, father of accused Mohd.
Ayan and Rs. 50,000/- from accused Veer Bhan, father of accused
Deepanshu Choudhary.
After investigation, the present charge-sheet has
been filed arraying 12 persons as accused without arraying
Khursheed Alam as an accused despite the fact that the specific
role and involvement of Khursheed Alam is specifically
mentioned in the charge-sheet itself.
The present charge-sheet has been forwarded by
ASP and SP, CBI/EO-II/New Delhi.
Issue notice to SP, CBI, EO-II, New Delhi to file
written reply as to on what grounds and on what basis,
Khursheed Alam was not made an accused in the present case
and on what grounds and on what basis, he was made witnesses
-- 2 of 3 --
in the present case despite he being actively involved in the
commission of offences mentioned in the charge-sheet returnable
for NDOH.
Put up for filing of reply on 06.03.2026.
Copy of this order be sent to concerned SP
alongwith the notice.
(Mayank Goel)
ACJM-02-cum-ACJ
RADC/New Delhi/12.02.2026
-- 3 of 3 --