Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:108017 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44464 of 2024 Applicant :- Imtiyaz Husain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Yadav,Karunesh Pratap Singh,Pradeep Kumar,Priyanka Sharma,Satendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Karunesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 08 of 2024, under Sections 7, 13(1)(B), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Anti Corruption Basti, District Gorakhpur during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is Lekhpal and as per allegation he made a demand of bribe from the complainant for the purpose of demarcation of his property and thereafter on 04.09.2024 he was apprehended red handed by Trap Team while he was receiving bribe of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false. 5. He further submits, on 30.07.2024 complainant moved an application for demarcation which was referred to applicant and on 13.08.2024 applicant submitted his report with regard to property in question and as per his report civil suit is pending before civil court and thereafter twice complainant moved applications for demarcation and again both times applicant submitted his report that with regard to property in question a civil suit is pending. 6. He further submits, applicant submitted his last report on 03.09.2024 and only due to reports submitted by the applicant, complainant became highly annoyed and next day by managing the Trap Team he implicated the applicant. 7. He further submits, civil suit with regard to property in question between complainant and his opponent was pending before the competent court, therefore, there was no question for the applicant to make a demand of bribe for demarcation of his property and actually complainant by illegal means wanted the demarcation. 8. He next submits, track record of the applicant is unblemished and he is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 04.09.2024 i.e. for last more than nine months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted applicant is Lekhpal and he was apprehended red handed by the Trap Team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 10,000/- from the complainant but could not dispute the fact that bribe was being demanded for demarcation and with regard to property in question civil suit was pending between complainant and his opponent and before the trap proceedings thrice applicant had already submitted his report in this regard. 10. 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 04.09.2024 i.e. for last more than nine months. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. Applicant is Lekhpal and as per allegation he made demand of bribe of Rs. 10,000/- for demarcation of the property of the complainant and on 04.09.2024 he was arrested red handed by the Trap Team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 10,000/- but it reflects, before trap when applications for demarcation were moved by the complainant then thrice applicant submitted his report with regard to property in question that civil suit is pending between complainant and his opponent. Considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 13. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and his service record appears to be unblemished and in the present matter he is in jail since 04.09.2024 i.e. for last more than nine months. 14. 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. 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 - Imtiyaz Husain 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. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad