JUDGMENT : ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J. 1. Heard Ms. Swati Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Roshan Kumar, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 275 of 2025, 7, 13(3) U.P. Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, P.S. Etmadpur, District Agra. 3. As per the prosecution story, an F.I.R. was lodged by Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. which was assigned to conduct the examination of Constable in R.P.F. on behalf of the Railway Board wherein allegation was made that in place of the applicant and three other persons, one unknown person appeared in the examination. The said F.I.R. was registered under Section 7 of 13(3) of the U.P. Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act. The Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. has also filed a chart, showing that in place of the applicant one unknown persons was found appearing in the examination. 4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that as per the chart annexed by learned A.G.A. in the counter affidavit, one unknown person is shown to be appeared as an imposter in place of different candidates, however, till date that unknown person has not been arrested and there is no material to show that the applicant is also part of that criminal activity. It is further submitted that unfair means used in any examination conducted on behalf of the Railway Board will not come within the purview of U.P. Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 as there is exclusion clause in the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024, showing that the examination conducted by the Railway Board will not be covered under U.P. Public Examination Act, but under the Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 (enacted by the Parliament as Act No.1 of 2024). Therefore, the entire proceeding is absolutely erroneous against the provision of the law. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 1.9.2025. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the investigation/trial proceedings. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid legal position. 6. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the investigation/trial proceedings. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid legal position. 6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it is not in dispute that the applicant is the candidate who appeared in the examination for Constable in R.P.F. which was conducted on behalf of the Railway Board, a question arises whether an examination conducted by the Railway Board or on behalf of the Railway Board would come within the purview of the U.P. Act No.8 of 2024, if there is allegation of using unfair means by any candidate. Though the object of the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024 is to prevent all unfair means, leakage of paper in public examination, proscribe solver gang and to prove for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto. The word "public examination" has been defined under Section 2(g) of the U.P. Act No.8 of 2024 which is being quoted as under:- " Section 2(g) "public examination" includes (i) any examination either qualifying or competitive for recruitment or regularization or promotion to any post in public service conducted by examination authority; (ii) any examination conducted by board, university or body under any law for the time being in force either qualifying or competitive for awarding or granting any degree, diploma, certificate or any other academic distinction or for qualifying for admission into any course of study ; and (iii) any other examination declared by the State Government by notification to be a public examination." 7. Examination authority with regard to public examination has been defined in Section 2(c) of the U.P. Act No.8 of 2024 which is being quoted under:- "2(c) " examination authority" in relation to public examination includes (i) Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission; (ii) Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Services Selection Commission; (iii) Board, University, Authority or Body under any law for the time being in force; (iv) any agency or recruitment committee engaged or constituted by the aforesaid Commission, Board, University, Authority or Body; and (v) any other authority, agency or recruitment committee constituted, declared or engaged by the State Government from time to time for conducting public examination." 8. Section 3(1) of the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024 provides that provision relating to sanction or penalty under this Act will not be applicable in any public examination conducted for acquiring academic, technical, professional or other qualifications. Therefore, if unfair means is used by any examinee in such examination then his answer-sheet shall not be evaluated and result of examinee shall be declared as per the procedure prescribed by such examination authority. Section 3(2) of the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024 further provides that "public examination" conducted by "public examination authorities" defined in Clause (k) and (l) of Sub Section (1) of Section 2 of the Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 (Act No.1 of 2024) are excluded from the purview of the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024. Section 3 of the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024 is being quoted as under:- " Section 3 .(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act provisions relating to sanction or penalty under this Act shall not apply to those examinee who are appearing in any public examination for acquiring academic, technical, professional or other qualification: Provided that if such examinee is found to use or in indulgence of unfair means in answering any paper in public examination, answer sheet of concerned paper of such examination shall not be evaluated and result of examination of such examinee shall be declared in the manner prescribed by examination authority. (2) The provisions of this Act shall not apply to the "public examination" conducted by "public examination authority" as they are respectively defined in clauses (k) and (l) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 ( Act no . 1 of 2024)." 9. From a perusal of Section 2(k) of the Act No. 1 of 2024, it is clear that Central Act covers the examinations conducted by central authorities which are mentioned in the Schedule as well as examinations conducted by any authority notified by the Central Government. Similarly, Section 2(l) provides that "public examination authority" means the authority specified by the Central Government by a notification for conducting public examinations. Similarly, Section 2(l) provides that "public examination authority" means the authority specified by the Central Government by a notification for conducting public examinations. Section 2(k) and (l) of the Act No.1 of 2024 are being quoted as under:- " Section 2(k) "public examination" means any examination conducted by the public examination authority, as specified in the Schedule, or conducted by such other authority as may be notified by the Central Government; 2(l) "public examination authority" means an authority as specified by the Central Government by a notification, from time to time for conducting the public examinations;" 10. From the perusal of the Schedule of the Act No. 1 of 2024, it is clear that examination conducted by the Railway Recruitment Boards would come within the purview of Act No.1 of 2024 and the same has been specifically excluded by Section 3(2) of the UP Act No.8 of 2024. Schedule of the Central Government regarding Section 2(k) is being quoted as under:- " THE SCHEDULE [See section 2(k)] ANY EXAMINATION CONDUCTED BY— 1. Union Public Service Commission. 2. Staff Selection Commission. 3. Railway Recruitment Boards. 4. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection. 5. Ministries or Departments of the Central Government and their attached and subordinate offices for recruitment of staff. 6. National Testing Agency. 7. Such other authority as may be notified by the Central Government." 11. From the perusal of the above analysis, it is clear that examination conducted by any examination authority mentioned in the Schedule of the Central Act No. 1 of 2024 (including the examination conducted by the Railway Recruitment Board or on its behalf by a nominated agency) would not come within the purview of the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024. Therefore, if unfair means is adopted by any candidate in any examination conducted by the nominated agency of the Central Government or by any authority as mentioned in the Schedule of the Central Act No.1 of 2024, that would not be punishable under the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024, but under Act No.1 of 2024 as the procedure for prosecution against the person involved in using the unfair means in the public examination conducted by such central authority has been prescribed under the Act No.1 of 2024. Therefore, the proceeding under the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024 for unfair means in the examination conducted by the Central Body would be erroneous. 12. Therefore, the proceeding under the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024 for unfair means in the examination conducted by the Central Body would be erroneous. 12. Therefore, on the conjoint reading of Section 3 of the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024 and Section 2(k) along with the Schedule of the Act No.1 of 2024, this Court holds that unfair means used in any examination conducted by the Central Government authorities as mentioned in the Schedule of the Act No. 1 of 2024 would come within the purview of the Act No.1 of 2024 and the criminal proceeding shall be conducted under the Act No.1 of 2024, not under the U.P. Act No.8 of 2024. It is further held that the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024 is applicable for public examinations conducted by the examining authorities mentioned in Section 2(c) of the U.P. Act No. 8 of 2024, but no penalty or sanction can be imposed against the candidate using unfair means in the examinations for acquiring academic, technical, professional or other qualifications. 13. The coordinate Bench of this Court in Bail Application No. 33546 of 2025 also considered this issue and observed that once the Central Government framed law regarding some criminal action, then prosecution of the same can be conducted under the Central Act even if there is Act of the State Government on that issue. 14. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that the prosecution against the applicant under the U.P. Act No.8 of 2024 itself appears to be erroneous as the public examination was not conducted by the State Government authorities, but by the Central Government authority and taking into account the nature of allegation, this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail during pendency of the investigation/trial. 15. Let the applicant- Vikas Kumar , involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- i. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment. iii. ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment. iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him. 16. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 17. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 18. The applicant shall be released on the basis of downloaded copy of this order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days. 19. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant. 20. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023; ?eported in (2024) 10 SCC 685 .