HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5449 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. It is alleged that while the applicant was posted as Sub-Inspector/Incharge at the Hanumantpura Police Post, he demanded and accepted a bribe amounting to Rs. 50,000/- from the complainant. The said incident is alleged to have occurred during a trap organized by the Anti-Corruption Organization on 10.03.2025, purportedly in connection with conducting a fair investigation. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, as per the admitted case of the prosecution, the recovery of the alleged bribe money was not effected from the personal search of the applicant but from beneath the pillow of a bed located in the rest room of the police post where the applicant was stationed. It is contended that there was neither any demand nor acceptance of bribe by the applicant. The alleged offence is punishable with imprisonment extending up to seven years. Since the charge sheet has already been submitted, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant incarcerated any further. It is further submitted that the applicant is in judicial custody since 11.03.2025, has no previous criminal antecedents, and is not a convicted person. The applicant, being a government servant, is stated to have maintained an unblemished service record. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raghvendra Pandey, Nikhil Dwivedi, Pranjal Krishna, Prerna Srivastava, Rahul Kumar, Suhaib Ashraf Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kapil Bharti .....Applicant(s) The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned AGA, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for bail, contending that there exists no plausible reason for the complainant, who himself is a police personnel, to falsely implicate the applicant in the present case. Upon due consideration of the material available on record, particularly the facts that the applicant is not a previous convict, is a government servant with a clean record, the maximum punishment prescribed under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act is seven years, and the charge sheet has already been filed, coupled with the facts that the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.03.2025 without any criminal antecedents, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Kapil Bharti involved in FIR/Crime No. 0003/2025, Under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018), P. S. - Anticorruption, Kanpur, District-A.C.O., U.P., 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance BAIL No. 5449 of 2025 2 with law. (v) The applicant 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 in accordance with law. (vi) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. November 10, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 5449 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench