Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36426 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3431 of 2025 Applicant :- Shobhit Srivastava Opposite Party :- Central Bureau Of Investigation Anti Corruption Lko Thru. Its Superintendent Of Police Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Mehrotra,Abhineet Jaiswal,Nadeem Murtaza Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurag Kumar Singh Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in FIR No. RC0062025A0005 of 2025 under section 7 of P.C. Act, 1988 P.S.- CBI/ACB District - Lucknow The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant was posted as Credit Officer in the bank in question and initially there was allegation that he has demanded Rs. 50,000/- as bribe, but subsequently, it was changed to Rs.10,000/- and how it was changed from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 10,000/-, no reason is assigned. He next added that there was grudge with the present applicant to the complainant and he was restricted from functioning of the Bank as Banking Correspondent and therefore, having animosity with the present applicant, the first information report has been lodged and false allegation has been levelled against him. He further submits that except apart the assertion, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant and matter has been concluded and chargesheet has been filed against the applicant thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidence or would threaten the witnesses coupled with the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 52 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is the bank employee and he will not flee away from the trial proceedings and he is languishing in jail since 01.03.2025 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that there are serious allegation against the applicant and the Investigating Officer has collected the substantial evidence against him and after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.03.2025; the chargesheet has been filed; the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 52 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant- Shobhit Srivastava involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 25.6.2025 Mayank Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench