Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12732 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 87 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajay Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Shukla,Rakesh Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Rejoinder Affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0634 of 2024, under sections 319(2)/ 318(4) of the B.N.S. and section 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988, Police Station-Sushant Golf City, District-Lucknow. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He added that the applicant has taken specific plea in paragraph nos. 10,11 & 12 of the bail application that he was working in IT Cell of the Traffic Directorate in Lucknow, subordinate to the complainant, S.I., Anand Kumar, who was the Incharge of the IT Cell and the user ID and password of uptp@nic.in were shared in between the five persons including the present applicant, but, the OTP can only been seen on the mobile link of the complainant and therefore, without knowledge of the complainant, nothing could be done and for saving the skin of the informant, the first information report has been lodged against the applicant. He added that the applicant is a government employee and he will not abscond from the investigation proceedings. Further submitted that there is an acute apprehension that the police will arrest the applicant and as such, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the averments made in paragraph nos. 10, 11 & 12 have been denied and the offence has been admitted by the applicant as is evident from the Annexure No. CA-01 appended at page no. 6 of the Counter Affidavit. Thus, submission is that the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on the record, it transpires that the applicant himself has admitted the offence as is evident from Annexure No. CA-1 appended at page no. 6 alongwith Counter Affidavit. Further, it is apparent that once the link is opened, the entries can be done and therefore, the argument of learned counsel for the applicant is not true on the fact of it. This court has also noticed the fact that the applicant is a police man and he should perform his duties more responsibly. Further since he is working in the police department, therefore, there is an apprehension that he may tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. . In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court do not find any good ground to intervene in this matter. The anticipatory bail application of the applicant, Ajay Sharma, is hereby rejected. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 AKS Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench