Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:132357 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7277 of 2024 Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shantanu Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajan Mishra, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Shantanu, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 193 of 2019, under Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Khatuali, District Muzaffarnagar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was posted as Kanungo and as per allegation, on his instruction co- accused Chandrapal Singh, Lekhpal made demand of bribe and received bribe from the complainant but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false. 4. He further submitted that when applicant approached this Court during investigation against the FIR of the present case in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 11266 of 2019 then after considering entire facts of the case on 29.04.2019 Division Bench of this Court was pleased to stay his arrest till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. and pursuant to the order dated 29.04.2019 applicant was not arrested during investigation but now charge sheet has been filed and there is no allegation that during investigation, he did not cooperate with the investigation. 5. He further submitted that applicant is having apprehension, if he will appear before the court concerned then he will be sent to jail. 6. He further submitted that as investigation of the case has already been concluded, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear to be necessary. 7. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history. 8. He further submitted that therefore, considering the above facts, applicant should be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial. 9. Per contra, learned A.G.A. however, opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. Applicant was posted as Kanungo and however as per allegation, on his instruction co-accused Chandrapal Singh, Lekhpal, made demand of bribe from the complainant and co- accused Chandrapal Singh was arrested red handed while he was receiving bribe from the complainant but it reflects, during investigation, Division Bench of this Court stayed the arrest of the applicant and there is no allegation that during investigation, he did not cooperate with the investigation. 12. Further, now charge sheet has been filed and this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that after submission of charge sheet, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant. 13. Further, considering the general practice adopted by the courts now-a-days, apprehension of arrest raised by applicant cannot be completely ruled out. 14. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history. 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-Narendra Kumar Sharma 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 that:- 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 :- 5.8.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad