Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:66322 Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28271 of 2024 Applicant :- Smt Simarjeet Kaur Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhinav Gaur,Ankit Shukla,Mohd. Rashid Siddiqui,Sr. Advocate 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 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 13 of 2024, under Sections 7, 13(1)(b) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Anti Corruption Bareilly, District Anti Corruption Organization U.P., during the pendency of trial. 3. As per the prosecution case, in brief, complainant Smt. Seema gave an application dated 21.05.2024 to the office of Anti Corruption Organization, Bareilly making allegations inter alia that she is accused of a case for the offence under Sections 384, 506 of I.P.C. and Section 67A of Information Technology (Amendment) Act registered at police station Islamnagar, district Budaun on 10.04.2024. Investigation of the said case was being done by the applicant Smt. Simarjeet Kaur who demanded a bribe of Rs. 50,000/- for filing the closure report in the said case. It is also the case of the prosecution that applicant was trapped on 28.05.2024 while taking bribe of Rs. 50,000/-. 4. Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the complainant was an accused in Case Crime No. 0159 of 2024 registered at police station Islamnagar, district Budaun under Sections 384, 506 I.P.C. and Section 67A of Information Technology (Amendment) Act on 10.04.2024, which was being investigated by the applicant. After culmination of investigation, applicant has submitted the final/closure report on 25.05.2024 in favour of the complainant and the same was already forwarded to higher authorities on the same day, therefore, there was no occasion for the applicant to take bribe in the matter on 28.05.2024. It is next submitted that before the trial court charge has been framed against the applicant on 28.10.2024. Thereafter 12.11.2024, 20.11.2024, 29.11.2024, 05.12.2024, 09.12.2024 and 17.12.2024 were the dates fixed for recording the statement of prosecution witnesses but they did not appear, therefore, on 20.12.2024 bailable warrant was issued to Inspector Sunil Kumar, who is informant of this case. Thereafter, Inspector Sunil Kumar appeared before the trial Court on 02.01.2025 and his examination-in-chief was partly recorded as PW-1 fixing next date on 10.01.2025 but again he did not turn,therefore, trial Court issued bailable warrant against Inspector Sunil Kumar (PW-1) on 10.01.2025, 16.01.2025, and 20.01.2025. Thereafter on 20.02.2025 again part examination-in-chief of Inspector Sunil Kumar (PW-1) was recorded fixing 01.03.2025 but again he did not turn up on 01.03.2025, 07.03.2025, 11.03.2025 and 19.03.2025, therefore, on 26.03.2025 non bailable warrant has been issued against him. On the strength of aforesaid fact, it is submitted that the trial of the applicant is deliberately being delayed by the prosecution adopting different modus operandi, whereas speedy trial of the applicant is her legal right. Referring the report dated 19.03.2025 and 28.03.2025 of Medical Officer, Central Jail-II, Bareilly, it is also submitted that physical condition of the applicant is not good. On account of serious illness, she could not be produced on 19.03.2025 before the trial court. Her treatment is going on in District Hospital, Bareilly and even she is not in a position to perform her daily routine work without any support. 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 is languishing in jail since 28.05.2024 and in case she is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case. 5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but could not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant. 6. 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 as noted above, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a prima facie case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. 7. Let the applicant-Smt. Simarjeet Kaur, 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: (i) That the applicant shall cooperate with 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 her 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. 8. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. 9. It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 Kashifa Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad