Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115651 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11880 of 2025 Applicant :- Vineet Kumar Saxena Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Adarsh Bhushan,Anurag Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Shri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State- respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.0003 of 2025, under Sections 7, 13(1)B, 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Anti Corruption Bareilly Region, District Bareilly, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was Secretary Gram Panchayat and as per allegation, he made demand of bribe of Rs.20,000/- from the complainant to clear the bill of his wife, who was ex gram pradhan and thereafter he was arrested red handed by the trap team while he was receiving bribe from him but entire allegation made against applicant is totally false. 4. He further submits that actually bill of the complainant could not be cleared as he did not earlier file details of his bill and he submitted bills only on 29.04.2025 i.e. after the alleged trap and therefore, there was absolutely no occasion for the applicant to make demand of bribe. 5. He further submits the fact that complainant submitted bill on 29.04.2025 is evident from page 11 of the supplementary affidavit dated 29.06.2025 filed in support of the instant bail application, which is the reply given by Village Development Officer under R.T.I. Act. 6. He further submits that actually complainant wanted to clear his payment without proper bill and when applicant shown his inability for the same then he implicated him in the present matter with the connivance of trap team. 7. He further submits that the applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 10.01.2025 i.e. for last more than six months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant was apprehended red handed while he was receiving bribe from the complainant and he also made demand of bribe from him but could not dispute the fact that as per allegation applicant was making demand of bribe for clearance of the bill of the wife of the complainant, who was ex gram pradhan but from the report of the Village Development Officer, it reflects, complainant submitted his bill only on 29.04.2025 i.e. after the alleged trap and it could not be reflected that before the trap, he had already submitted his bill. 9. He further could not dispute the fact that investigation of the case has already been completed and applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 10.01.2025 i.e. for last more than six months. 10. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, as per allegation, applicant was posted as Secretary Gram Panchayat and he made demand of bribe from the complainant to clear the bill of his wife, who was ex gram pradhan and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the trap team while he was receiving bribe from him but it reflects, the trap proceeding was conducted on 09.01.2025 while from the report submitted by Village Development Officer, it reflects, the bill was submitted by the complainant on 29.04.2025. Considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 12. Further, applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 10.01.2025 i.e. for last more than six months. 13. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail application should not be dismissed 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- Vineet Kumar Saxena 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 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. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad