Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114594 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 5404 of 2025 Applicant :- Neelam Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off. 2. Heard Sri Rajan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State. 3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 001 of 2024 modified Crime No. 9 of 2024, under Sections 7 and 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Tundla Firozabad transferred to Police Station Anti Corruption (Agra), District Agra with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail during trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is Excise Inspector and as per allegation on her instigation co-accused Suraj Kumar, who was Excise Constable received bribe but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false. He further submits, except the statement of co-accused there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 5. He further submits, during investigation applicant has not been arrested and she fully cooperated with the investigation and even during investigation her statement was also recorded, which has been annexed along with instant application. 6. He further submits, as all the alleged offences are punishable with maximum punishment of seven years, therefore, without arrest of the applicant charge-sheet has been filed. 7. He further submits, after submission of the charge-sheet custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required and applicant is having apprehension that if she will appear before the court concerned then she will be sent to jail. 8. He further submits, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case relates to family dispute. He further submits, applicant is a lady. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, as per allegation, on the instructions of the applicant, who was public servant, co-accused Suraj Kumar, who was Excise Constable made demand of bribe and thereafter he was arrested red handed by the Trap Team but it reflects, only evidence against the applicant is the statement of co-accused and her confessional statement before the police. 12. Further, charge-sheet has already been submitted and during investigation applicant has not been arrested and it reflects, during investigation applicant cooperated with the investigation. Further, all the alleged offences are punishable with maximum punishment of seven years. 13. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case relates to matrimonial dispute. 14. Further, applicant is a lady and after submission of the charge- sheet custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear to be necessary and apprehension of arrest raised by the applicant cannot be ruled out. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed. 17. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Neelam Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions:- i. 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; ii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; iii. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; v. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; 18. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant. 19. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad