Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36617 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5682 of 2025 Applicant :- Hari Shankar @ Hari Shankar Saroj Opposite Party :- Cbi Thru. Superintendent Of Police , Cbi/Acb Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Ojha,Pawan Kumar Dubey,Shivendra S Singh Rathore Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurag Kumar Singh Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. C.M.A. No.IA/2/2025 (Application for Correction/Modification) 1. Correction/Modification application filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant is pressing the instant correction/modification application and submits that due to typographical error, the name of father of the applicant "Late Bhikhari Saroj" has wrongly been transcribed as "B. Saroj". He submits that the same may be corrected. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the opposite party has no objection to the contention aforesaid. 4. In view of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to correct the same during the course of the day. 5. The correction/modification application is hereby allowed. Order on Bail Application 6. Counter affidavit filed by Shri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the C.B.I. is taken on record. 7. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the C.B.I. and perused the record. 8. 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.RC0062025A0013, dated 03.05.2025, under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 61(2) of B.N.S., registered at Police Station- C.B.I. ACB, District- Lucknow. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He next submits that though the applicant is named in the first information report, but there is no demand of illegal gratification and that the co-accused Anil Matlani, who was then posted at Kaushambi, has already been given the benefit of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 and he was not even arrested by the C.B.I. Further submission is that so far as the proceeding of trial is concerned, that too is not in accordance with law. He further submits that there is no direct or indirect evidence against the applicant and the case is totally based on circumstantial evidence. He next submits that the motive and occasion is not substantiated as the applicant was posted at Prayagraj at the time of the alleged incident. Further submission is that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 03.05.2025. He further submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings, thus submission is that he may be enlarged on bail. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the C.B.I. has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that there is ample evidence of demand of illegal gratification and the conversation has also been traced out. He next submits that the investigation is going on and prima facie it is found that the applicant is involved in committing the offence, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 11. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant was posted at Prayagraj at the time of alleged incident and person who was posted at Kaushambi was not even arrested and he had also been given the benefit of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra). This Court has also noticed the fact that so far as demand of illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/- is concerned, prima facie, it is not apparent from the assertion of the first information report. The applicant has no previous criminal history and there is no complaint that he is not cooperating in the investigation. Further the applicant is languishing in jail since 03.05.2025 and he has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 12. 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. 13. Let the applicant- Hari Shankar @ Hari Shankar Saroj 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:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (ii) 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 IPC (Now Section 269 BNS); (iii) 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. (Now Section 351 BNSS); and (iv) 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. (Now Section 84 BNSS) 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 IPC (Now Section 209 BNS). 14. 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. 15. 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 :- 26.6.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench