HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 12309 of 2024 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Vibhu Rai, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Abhinav Gaur, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay Bahadur Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 608 of 2024, under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(b) and 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was posted as in-charge Inspector in police station and as per allegation, he purchased the properties beyond his known source of income by pressurizing number of persons but entire allegation made against the applicant is totally false. 4. He further submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2024 and charge sheet has been filed on 07.07.2025 and cognizance has been taken on 07.08.2025 and there is no allegation that applicant did not cooperate with the investigation, therefore, it appears, without arrest of the applicant charge sheet has been filed. He further submitted that as charge sheet has been filed, therefore, after submission of the charge sheet, custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear to be necessary. 5. He further submitted that applicant is having apprehension, if he will appear before the court concerned then he will be sent to jail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhinav Gaur, Ankit Shukla, Mohd. Rashid Siddiqui, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Naresh Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. He further submitted that however, apart from the present case, applicant has also been made accused in one another case but in that case, this Court has stayed his arrest during investigation. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. however, opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, applicant is public servant and he was in-charge Inspector in police station and it appears to be a case of disproportionate income but it reflects, during investigation, applicant has not been arrested and without arrest of the applicant, charge sheet has been filed, however, he fully cooperated with the investigation. 10. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that after submission of charge sheet, there is no need of custodial interrogation of applicant. 11. Further, apprehension of arrest raised by applicant cannot be ruled out. 12. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant has also been made accused in one another case but in that case, this Court has stayed his arrest during investigation. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed. 15. In the event of arrest of the applicant,Naresh Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- i. that 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 NABAIL No. 12309 of 2024 2 or tamper with the evidence; ii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; iii. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; v. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; 16. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant. 17. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 23, 2025 KK Patel NABAIL No. 12309 of 2024 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad