Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114016 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12559 of 2025 Applicant :- Veerpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Arun Srivastav,Vishal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. From the record, it reflects, on 02.05.2025 a direction was given to the trial court to frame charges against accused within three weeks and it was also directed that trial court shall record the statement of the complainant but from the report dated 10.07.2025 submitted by the District Judge, Bareilly, it reflects, the court of Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) is vacant where the trial of instant matter is pending, therefore, earlier order passed by this Court could not be complied. 2. In view of above, the instant bail application is being heard on merit. 3. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 4. Heard Dr. Arun Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 5. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 06 of 2025, under Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Anti Corruption Bareilly, District Bareilly during pendency of the trial. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is the driver of Block Education Officer Avnish Kumar and co-accused Avnish Kumar was the person, who made demand of bribe from the complainant and thereafter as per allegation, applicant received bribe of Rs. 5,000/- from the complainant on his instruction but earlier allegation made against him is false. He further submits, admittedly applicant did not make any demand of bribe. 7. He further submits, for offence under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act demand of bribe and its acceptance both are sine qua non and without demand of bribe a person cannot be made accused under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act. 8. He further submits, even from the record, it reflects, co-accused Avnish Kumar was the principal accused but he has been released on anticipatory bail and his order has been annexed at page-8 of the supplementary affidavit dated 13.06.2025 filed in support of instant bail application. 9. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 20.02.2025 i.e. for last almost five months. 10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant was apprehended red handed while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 5,000/- from the complainant on the instruction of co-accused Avnish Kumar, the Block Education Officer but could not dispute, applicant did not make any demand of bribe. 11. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that investigation of the case has already been concluded and in the present matter applicant is in jail since 20.02.2025 i.e. for last almost five months and he is not having any criminal history and co-accused Avnish has been released on anticipatory bail. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, as per allegation, applicant was driver of co-accused Avnish Kumar, the Block Education Officer and on his instructions, he received bribe of Rs 5,000/- from the complainant and was apprehended red handed by the Trap Team but from the record, it reflects, applicant did not make any demand of bribe from the complainant and the same was made by co-accused Avnish Kumar, the Block Education Officer concerned. 14. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that for offences under Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act demand of bribe and its acceptance both are necessary. 15. Further, co-accused Avnish Kumar, the Block Education Officer has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court. 16. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 20.02.2025 i.e. for last almost five months. 17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 19. Let the applicant - Veerpal 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. 20. 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. 21. 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 :- 15.7.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad