HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 50992 of 2025 Court No. - 53 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Shah and Sri Umesh Kumar Singh, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Raj Kamal Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.3 and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant Manjeet Kumar, with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the summoning/taking of cognizance order dated 01.07.2025, charge sheet dated 28.06.2025 as well as entire proceedings of Special Session Trial No. 537 of 2025 (State of U.P. Vs. Akash Singh and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 04 of 2025, under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, P.S. Anti Corruption Prayagraj, District ACO UP, pending in the court of Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Special Court No.3, Varanasi and with a further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the said case, during the pendency of the present application. 4. The facts of the case are that a First Information Report was lodged by Anjali Yadav on 02.05.2025 against Akash Singh and the applicant on the basis of recovery of currency notes in trap proceedings. A total of Rs. 10,000/- was recovered in the said raid. The allegation is that co-accused Akash Singh the Executive Engineer Electricity Department took the money and handed it over to the applicant and both were got in trap and proceedings of trap were conducted and they were arrested. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted as under: (i) The applicant has bee falsely implicated in the present case. (ii) The applicant was posted as a lineman on contractual basis through service provider of M/s TDS Management Consultant Private Limited, Plot Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atul Kumar Shahi, Sanju Singh, Umesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Raj Kamal Singh Manjeet Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) No. E-193, TDS Tower, Industrial Area, Phase 8B, Mohali, Punjab, 16005. (iii) The applicant was under the control and command of co-accused Akash Singh. (iv) The proceedings of trap were conducted entirely at the police station and thus its sanctity is seriously doubted. (v) There is no evidence of demand and acceptance of bribe money by the applicant and thus the prosecution cannot proceed against him. (vi) The original complainant Manoj Kumar Gupta has in para 4 of his short counter affidavit dated 18.12.2025 stated that he has no complaint or grievance against the present applicant as he had never demanded any bribe from him and he has no objection to the present proceedings against the applicant are quashed by this Court. (vii) While placing para 36 of the affidavit in support of the application U/s 528 BNSS that order of sanction is not in accordance with law and provisions of law and thus the same is seriously challenged. (viii) Judgments of the Apex Court in the cases of State of Lokayuktha Police, Davanagere Vs. C.B. Nagraj : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 620, B. Jayaraj Vs. State of A.P. : 2014 (13) SCC 55 and P. Satyanarayana Murthy Vs. Dist. Inspector of Police : 2015 (10) SCC 152 have been placed to argue that since the demand of bribe money by the applicant has not been proved, the chain and circumstances are not complete and thus the prosecution needs to be quashed. 6. Learned counsel for the original complainant/opposite party no.3 although is present but he does not oppose the argument of the present petition and only places para 4 of his short counter affidavit in support of the application and states that he has no objection if present proceedings are quashed. 7. Learned counsel for the State opposed the petition vehemently and submitted as under: (i) The applicant is named in the FIR. (ii) The applicant was arrested from the spot and in a trap wherein cash money was taken by co-accused Akash Singh the Junior Engineer who then handed it over to the applicant by stating that it shall be distributed later on and thus the applicant was apprehended and even the solution test in so far as the applicant is related showed positive results. (iii) The question of sanction cannot be a ground for quashing of the proceedings or discharge of the applicant as the same is a matter of trap. (iv) Merely by the original complainant stating that he has no objection for quashing of the proceedings in so far as the applicant is related cannot be the NA528 No. 50992 of 2025 2 ground for quashing the said proceedings. (v) The applicant has been arrested with currency notes and in trap proceedings and thus it cannot be said that he has been falsely implicated. (vi) There were independent witnesses also to the trap proceedings. (vii) The proceedings were conducted at the police station for the reasons recorded in the recovery memo and FIR which is duly explained. (viii) The present application U/s 528 BNSS cannot be allowed on the ground that the chain at this stage of demand and acceptance is not complete inasmuch as the same is a matter of trial and evidence will be led for it and then a reasonable conclusion will be drawn by the trial court. (ix) It is submitted that thus the present petition be dismissed. 8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant was arrested in trap proceedings. Co- accused Akash Singh was also arrested. Solution test proved positive during the course of trap proceedings. Cash money was recovered from the possession of the applicant. Challenge to the sanction order and also to the chain and circumstances regarding demand and acceptance has to be proved in the trial. The judgments as relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant were after trial in which evidence had been led and thus the same are distinguishable on facts. 9. In view of the same, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no ground to interfere in the matter and is rejected. 10. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed. of. February 13, 2026 M. ARIF NA528 No. 50992 of 2025 3 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad