Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:106640 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2945 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohammad Nazim Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Maurya,Shweta Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Singh, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 20 of 2024, under Sections 7/13(1)(B), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Anti corruption, District Moradabad during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is Lekhpal and as per allegation he made a demand of Rs. 15,000/- from the complainant for the purpose of demarcation of the property of his daughter and he was apprehended red handed by the Trap Team while he was receiving bribe from him but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false. 4. He further submits, for demarcation it is necessary that a person should move an application under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code and thereafter when SDM concerned will pass order in this regard then thereafter Lekhpal can start proceedings of demarcation and in the present matter admittedly complainant did not move any application under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code and, therefore, applicant was not having any authority to start demarcation proceedings and therefore, there was absolutely neither any occasion for the applicant to make demand of bribe nor there was any occasion for the complainant to give any bribe and this fact clearly suggests that on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been roped in the present matter by the complainant with the connivance of Trap Team. 5. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and his track record is clean and in the present matter he is in jail since 05.12.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 6. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant was apprehended red handed by the Trap Team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 15,000/- from the complainant and he is Lekhpal but could not dispute the fact that bribe was allegedly being made by the applicant for demarcation of the property of the daughter of the complainant but neither complainant nor his daughter moved any application before SDM concerned under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code. 7. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that without the order of SDM concerned under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code Lekhpal on his own cannot start proceedings of demarcation. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 05.12.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 8. However, as per allegation, applicant was Lekhpal and he make demand of Rs. 15,000/- for demarcation of the property of the daughter of complainant and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the Trap Team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 15,000/- from him but it reflects, complainant without moving application under U.P. Revenue Code was trying to start demarcation proceedings and there is no material available on record which can suggests that there was any order of SDM concerned for demarcation. Considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned defence counsel, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 9. Further, from the record, it reflects, the track record of the applicant is unblemished. 10. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 05.12.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 11. Further, unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose. 12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 14. Let the applicant - Mohammad Nazim be released on bail in the aforesaid case on 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 appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 15. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 16. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 7.7.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad