HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43083 of 2024 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Swetashwa Agarwal and Sri Mukesh Kumar, learned counsels 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. 01 of 2024 (Amended/converted as Case Crime No. 04 of 2024), under Sections 7, 13(1)(b) and 13(2) P.C. Act, Police Station Anti Corruption, District Aligarh Division Aligarh during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant was Lekhpal and as per allegation complainant moved an application for measurement of a land in question which was marked to applicant for submitting the report and for that he was asking for bribe and thereafter he was apprehended by the Trap Team while he was receiving bribe money but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false. 4. He further submits, as per prosecution, applicant was trapped on 28.08.2024 but on 24.08.2024 i.e. four days before he had already submitted his report, which has been annexed at page-193 of the paper-book and this fact clearly suggests that on the basis of false allegation complainant implicated the applicant with the connivance of Trap Team. 5. He further submits, actually complainant was having enmity with his brother and he used to move the applications and on 08.08.2024 also applicant submitted a report against the complainant, which has been annexed at page-180 of the paper-book and only due to this reason Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mukesh Kumar, Swetashwa Agarwal, Yash Raj Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sipahi Ram Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) complainant became highly annoyed with him and thereafter applicant has been falsely made accused in the present matter. 6. He further submits, even from the FIR it reflects, after the alleged trap applicant has taken to the police station and recovery memo of the alleged trap has been prepared at the police station and this fact casts serious doubt on the trap proceedings. 7. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.08.2024 i.e. for last more than one year. 8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant was public servant and he made demand of bribe from the complainant and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the Trap Team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 10,000/- but could not dispute the fact that trap was made on 28.08.2024 and as per allegation applicant was asking bribe for submitting report on the application moved by the complainant but on 24.08.2024 i.e. four days before the trap applicant had already submitted the report. 9. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that recovery memo of the alleged trap has not been prepared at spot and the same was prepared at police station. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, as per allegation, applicant was Lekhpal and he made demand of bribe from the complainant for submitting report on the application moved by complainant, which was marked to him and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the Trap Team on 28.08.2024 but it reflects, on 24.08.2024 i.e. four days before the alleged trap applicant had already submitted the report for which he was allegedly making demand of bribe. 12. Further, from the FIR it also reflects, recovery memo of the trap has not been prepared at spot and same was prepared at police station. Considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that this fact casts serious doubt on the prosecution case cannot be prima facie ruled out at this stage. BAIL No. 43083 of 2024 2 13. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose. 14. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.08.2024 i.e. for last more than one year. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant - Sipahi Ram Yadav 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. 18. 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. 19. 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. September 10, 2025 AK Pandey BAIL No. 43083 of 2024 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad