HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28092 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed by State and rejoinder affidavit filed by applicant are taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Rajan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State-respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 001 of 2025 transferred as Case Crime No. 0005 of 2025, under Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station- Raya, Mathura transferred to Police Station-Anti-Corruption Agra, District- ACO U.P. Agra, pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was Revenue Inspector and as per allegation, mutation proceeding of complainant was pending before the Tehsildar concerned and to submit report applicant made demand of bribe from him and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the trap team while he was receiving Rs. 50,000/- from him but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false. 5. He further submitted that applicant was apprehended on 31.05.2025 but on 28.05.2025 applicant had already submitted required report to Tehsildar concerned and this fact is evident from page no. 9 of the rejoinder affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application and, therefore, there was no occasion for the complainant to give bribe to the applicant. 6. He further submitted that even from the FIR, it reflects, after the alleged trap applicant and complainant have been taken to police station and at police station hands of the applicant were washed and at police station recovery memo was prepared and this fact casts serious doubt on the entire Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Narendra Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) trap proceeding. 7. He further submitted that investigation of the case has already been concluded and applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 31.05.2025 i.e. for last four months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant was Revenue Inspector and he not only made demand of bribe to submit his report but he was also apprehended red handed by the trap team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 50,000/- but could not dispute the fact that the alleged trap was made on 31.05.2025 and on 28.05.2025 i.e. before the trap applicant had already submitted his report to Tehsildar concerned. 9. He further could not dispute the fact that from the FIR it reflects, after the alleged trap applicant has been taken to the police station and at police station hands of the applicant were washed and at police station recovery memo was prepared. 10. He further could not dispute the fact that investigation of the case has already been concluded and charge sheet has been filed and applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail for last four months. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, as per allegation, applicant was posted as Revenue Inspector and he made demand of bribe from the complainant to submit his report in his mutation case, which was pending before the Tehsildar concerned and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the trap team but it reflects, on 31.05.2025 trap was made and on 28.5.2025 i.e. well before the alleged trap, applicant had already submitted his report to Tehsildar. 13. Further, from the FIR it reflects, after the alleged trap applicant and complainant have been taken to police station and at police station hands of the applicant were washed and at police station recovery memo was prepared. Considering this fact, argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that this fact casts serious doubt on the entire trap proceeding, cannot be completely ruled out. 14. Further, investigation of the case has already been concluded and applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 31.05.2025 i.e. for last four months. 15. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed either for punitive BAIL No. 28092 of 2025 2 or preventive purpose. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant- Narendra Kumar 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. 19. 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. 20. 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. September 26, 2025 KK Patel BAIL No. 28092 of 2025 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad