HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33809 of 2025 Court No. - 73 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Shashank Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rajiv Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.7 of 2025, under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Anti Corruption, Gonda, District Gonda during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was posted as Lekhpal and as per the allegation for the measurement of the land of complainant, he made demand of bribe from him and thereafter, he was arrested red-handed by the trap team, and Rs.20,000/- of bribe money was recovered from his possession but the entire allegations levelled against the applicant are totally false. 5. He further submits that complainant made complaint against the applicant on 01.08.2025 and the trap was conducted on 08.08.2025 but Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashwini Kumar, Ganesh Shanker Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sarver Ali .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) even before the trap, on 03.08.2025, applicant had already submitted his report, which is evident from page 67 of the paper book and this fact shows that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. 6. He further submits that even from the FIR, it reflects that after the alleged trap, applicant and complainant were taken to the police station and at police station their hands were washed and even the recovery memo was prepared at the police station and this fact casts serious doubt on the entire trap proceeding. 7. He further submits that however apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case relates to Section 498-A IPC and criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant application. He next submits, the investigation of the case has been completed, and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 08.08.2025, i.e., for last more than two months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant is a dishonest public servant and he not only made demand of bribe but also accepted the bribe amount and was also apprehended red- handed by the trap team but could not dispute other arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. Applicant was posted as Lekhpal and as per allegation, for the measurement of the land of complainant, he made demand of bribe from him and was apprehended red-handed by the trap team but it reflects that trap was conducted on 08.08.2025 but even before the trap, on 03.08.2025 , after completing the measurement, applicant had already submitted his report. Considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that he has been falsely made accused, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 11. Further, even from the FIR, it reflects that neither hands of the applicant and complainant were washed on the spot where the trap was BAIL No. 33809 of 2025 2 conducted nor alleged trap money was sealed at the spot and even recovery memo has not been prepared at the spot and it appears all these formalities have been completed at police station. Considering this fact, argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that these procedural lapse casts serious doubt on the entire trap proceedings, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 12. Further, applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case relates to Section 498-A IPC and criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant application, Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 08.08.2025 i.e. for last more than two months and investigation of the case has already been completed. 13. Further, the law is settled unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail should not be rejected for punitive purpose. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant - Sarver Ali be released on bail in the aforesaid case on 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 appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will BAIL No. 33809 of 2025 3 be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 18. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. October 15, 2025 S.A. BAIL No. 33809 of 2025 4 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- SALMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad