Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142796 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24284 of 2025 Applicant :- Pramod Tyagi Opposite Party :- Central Bureau Of Investigation Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Mishra,Ratnesh Mishra,Shubham Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Rahul Srivastava Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Ajay Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for C.B.I. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in R.C. No. 1202025A0008 under Sections 7A Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station- C.B.I., A.C.B., Ghaziabad District- Ghaziabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that as per allegation, applicant was loan agent of a bank and he made demand of bribe from the complainant to clear his loan and thereafter he was arrested red handed by the C.B.I. team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 15,000/- from him but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false. 4. He further submitted that actually, applicant only provided help to the complainant to clear his loan and for his services he received commission and from the entire investigation conducted by C.B.I., it could not be reflected that he in any manner influenced any public servant. He further submitted that even charge sheet has been filed only against applicant and no bank official has been made accused by the C.B.I. He further submitted that admittedly applicant is private person and maximum punishment for the offence under Section 7A P.C. Act is seven years. 5. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 16.04.2025 i.e. for last more than four months. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for C.B.I. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant posed himself to be the person, who was having influence over the bank official and by doing so he used to extort/extract money illegally from the customers of the bank and he received Rs. 15,000/- from the complainant for clearing his loan amount and he was also apprehended red handed by C.B.I. and therefore, it cannot be said that no offence under Section 7A P.C. Act is made out against him but could not dispute the fact that investigation of the case has been concluded and during investigation, it could not be revealed that applicant was having any influence over any bank official and therefore charge sheet was filed only against the applicant. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter for last more than for months. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 8. However, as per allegation, applicant claimed himself to be loan agent of bank and he made demand of money from the complainant to clear his loan amount and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by C.B.I. while he was receiving alleged bribe from the complainant but admittedly applicant is not the public servant and he is private person. Further, considering the complaint filed by complainant and charge sheet filed by C.B.I. prima facie, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that if applicant against his services received money from any person without influencing any public servant then he cannot be held responsible under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act. 9. Further, from the charge sheet submitted by C.B.I. it is apparent that during investigation, it could not be surfaced that applicant was having any influence over the public servant including any bank official, therefore, charge sheet was filed only against him. 10. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 16.04.2025 i.e. for last more than four months. 11. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty, an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application of an accused should not be dismissed for punitive purpose. 12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 14. Let the applicant- Pramod Tyagi 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. 15. 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. 16. 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 :- 20.8.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad