Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10876 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9914 of 2024 Applicant :- Shiv Baran Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Verma,Atul Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State 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 Case Crime No. 12 of 2024, under Sections 7, 13(1)(b), 13(2) of P.C. Act, 1988, Police Station Anti- Corruption Lucknow, District Unnao. 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 applicant was posted as Village Panchayat Secretary and he lodged an FIR on 19th of October, 2023 against the complainant mentioning that the complainant is making hindrance in the government work. Further submission is that the applicant had also moved an application on 30th of November, 2023 before the Assistant Development Officer (ADO), Purwa, Unnao, while requesting that interruption is being made in the village Panchayat, Chamiyani and, therefore, he may be transferred to any other cluster. Adding his argument, he submits that due to anonymity, the applicant has been made scapegoat, though no such demand has ever been made by him. He also submitted that the alleged demand is not proved with any evidence and only the allegations are made on behalf of the complainant. He next submits that this case is squarely covered with the ratio of judgment rendered in the case of Neeraj Dutta Vs. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) reported in (2023) 4 Supreme Court Cases, 731. He further submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.08.2024 having no previous criminal history to his credit and the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and would cooperate in the trial proceedings, thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that there are ample evidences against the applicant that he was involved in demanding the illegal gratification and after thorough investigation, the chargesheet has been filed, as such, he is not entitled for bail. Having considered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the applicant had already made a complaint against the complainant that he is creating hindrance in government work and the applicant had also moved an application for his transfer to another cluster for the said reason; the allegation of any illegal gratification is not prima facie substantiated with any evidence and, as such, no criminal proceeding can go on in view of the law settled by Apex Court in the case of Neeraj Dutta (supra); the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.08.2024 having no previous criminal history to his credit and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted 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-Shiv Baran Singh 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 :- 18.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench