Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65031 Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12263 of 2025 Applicant :- Sikandar Kumar Sonkar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. 1-Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State. 2-The instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 02 of 2025, under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station-Anti Corruption Varanasi, District-Anti Corruption Organization, U.P. (Varanasi) during the pendency of trial. 3-As per the prosecution case, complainant gave a complaint on 03.03.2025 to Deputy Commissioner of Police, Anti Corruption Organization, Varanasi, Division Varanasi making allegation inter-alia that he is running a shop of tiles and marble under the name and style of Science Ceramic and Industries situated at Amra Akhri, Varanasi. On account of non-deposit of VAT in time, his matter is pending before Sales Tax Office and when he went to Bank of India to know the statement of his bank account, he came to know that his bank account has been seized by Amin (present applicant) and subsequently, when he met with the applicant, he demanded a bribe of Rs. ten thousand for getting his bank account defreezed. Later on applicant was trapped while accepting bribe on 04.03.2025. Thereafter on 05.03.2025, F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant. 4-It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that on the day of moving complaint i.e. 03.03.2025, the bank account of the complainant was not freezed but the same was freezed vide order dated 04.03.2025 of Assistant Collector / Deputy Collector, Division 8, Varanasi, hence, the fact mentioned in the complaint dated 03.03.2025 regarding freezure of his account is not correct, hence, there was no occasion for the applicant to make alleged demand. Much emphasis has been given by contending that applicant has no jurisdiction or power to defreeze the bank account of the complainant. It is also pointed out that in the complainant dated 03.03.2025, there is no date and time of alleged demand of bribe. The trap was not done in accordance with law. In this regard it is submitted that arrest of the applicant was shown on 04.03.2025 at about 12:08 O'clock, whereas F.I.R. was lodged on 05.03.2025 at 10:14 O'clock.The allegation of demand of bribe against the applicant is wholly false. Lastly it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 04.03.2025. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case. 5-Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that in-fact the bank account of the complainant was freezed on 01.03.2024 but by over-writing, the date of the freezing order was changed from 01 to 04. 6-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it not in dispute that applicant had no power to freeze or defreeze the bank account of the complainant. The account of the complainant was freezed by Assistant Collector / Deputy Collector, Division 8, Varanasi. There is no explanation of delay in lodging F.I.R.as noted above. Whether the date of the freezing order was changed from 01 to 04 or not is a matter of evidence before the trial Court. If date of freezing order is found 04.03.2025, then basis of complaint will become doubtful. 7-Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. 8-Let the applicant-Sikandar Kumar Sonkar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That 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. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail. 9-In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 Saurabh Digitally signed by :- SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad