Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20020 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2984 of 2025 Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Tudu @ Ramesh Kumar Opposite Party :- Central Bereau Of Investigation Thru. Cbi/Acb Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pranjal Krishna,Suhaib Ashraf Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurag Kumar Singh Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Pranjal Krishna, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the C.B.I. and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.RC0062025A0001, Police Station C.B.I./A.C.B. Lucknow, under Sections 61(2) of B.N.S., 2023 r/w 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018), pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Anti- corruption,C.B.I. Court No.2, Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation at about 14.50 hrs. on 04.02.2025 against the applicant, who is Sub Divisional Inspector posted at Head Post Office, Azamgarh, U.P. and another person Sri Brikesh Pandey, Overseer Head Post Office, Azamgarh stating that complaint dated 03.02.2025 was received from Rohan Gupta alleging that the complainant has been selected as Assistant Branch Postmaster and the applicant had demanded Rs.25,000/- for allowing him to join his duties. The complaint has been discreetly verified and was substantiated and thereafter the F.I.R. was registered. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 5. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant annexing therewith charge-sheet dated 29.03.2025 submitted by the C.B.I. wherein it is recorded that the investigation has revealed that the verification proceedings concluded at 14:45 hours on 04.02.2025. Thereafter, verification memo and reports were sent to the Branch and thereafter the F.I.R. was lodged, which has been registered at Lucknow on 04.02.2025 at 14:50 hours. 6. As per the averments made in the charge-sheet, an independent witness Shri Manoj Yadav was directed to act as a shadow witness and to accompany the complainant. The complainant was instructed to talk to the accused in such an audible manner so that the conversation is heard by the shadow witness. Upon this, the complainant told that the accused persons do not talk freely in front of strangers. 7. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the complainant had met the accused persons only at one occasion for joining his duties when they had allegedly demanded bribe. This assertion made in the charge-sheet that the complainant had told that the accused persons do not talk freely in front of strangers, is without any basis. 8. It is further recorded in the charge-sheet that after the Phenolphthalein was applied on all the currency notes, all members of C.B.I. team and the witnesses had washed their hands with soap and water to ensure that no particles of Phenolphthalein powder remained on their hands, but the complainant had not washed his hands. 9. The learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that a perusal of the post-trap memo indicates that a shadow witness was not present at the spot and he was unable to hear the conversation at the time of alleged demand and handing over of bribe money. The money has been recovered from one Achhey Lal and not from any of the accused persons. Further, two more people were present at the spot and their statements have not been recorded. It is said that CCTV cameras were installed at the place of the incident but the C.B.I. has stated that the CCTV footage could not be brought on record due to some technical difficulty. 10. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the C.B.I. has opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted that the complainant has stated that upon reaching the office, he found the applicant standing outside his office in a verandah and the applicant directed him to hand over the bribe money to Achhey Lal. He has submitted that although the shadow witness could not hear the conversation that took place inside the room, demand of money was made in the verandah which was witnessed by the shadow witness. However, the shadow witness stated that he could not hear the conversation which took place in the verandah also. 11. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 05.02.2025 and without making any observation, which may affect the outcome of the trial, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime. 12. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 13. Let the applicant-Ramesh Kumar Tudu @ Ramesh Kumar 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 magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench