HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28572 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed by State is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Raghuvansh Misra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.N. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 4 of 2025, under Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station-Sadar Bazar, District-Saharanpur transferred/ Converted to Case Crime No. 6 of 2025 under Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 as amended in 2018 at Police Station ACO, Saharanpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was assistant in the office of C.M.O. and as per allegation, an application for compassionate appointment of wife of the complainant was pending in the office of C.M.O. and for expeditious disposal of the same applicant made demand of bribe from the complainant and thereafter he was arrested red handed by the trap team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 10,000/- from him but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false. 5. He further submitted that from the FIR, it reflects, neither hands of the applicant were washed at the place where trap was made nor recovery memo was prepared at spot and it appears, 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 trap proceeding. 6. 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manish Kumar Tripathi, Raghuvansh Misra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rakesh Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) since 16.05.2025 i.e. for last more than 4 months. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is dishonest public servant and he not only made demand of bribe but he also accepted the bribe and at the time of acceptance he was also apprehended red handed but could not dispute the fact that 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. 8. He further could not dispute the fact that investigation of the case has already been concluded and applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail for last more than 4 months. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. Applicant was posted as assistant in the office of C.M.O. and as per allegation, an application of complainant for compassionate appointment of his wife was pending in the office of C.M.O. and for expeditious disposal of the same applicant made demand of bribe from the complainant and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the trap team but 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. 11. Considering the above facts, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that this fact casts serious doubt on the entire trap proceeding. 12. Further, investigation of the case has already been concluded and applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 16.05.2025 i.e.for last more than four months. 13. Further, it appears, applicant is detained in jail in the present matter for the offence punishable under Section 7 P.C. Act and maximum 7 years sentence is provided for the offence under Section 7 P.C. Act. 14. 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 or preventive purpose. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. BAIL No. 28572 of 2025 2 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant- Rakesh 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. 18. 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. 19. 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 25, 2025 KK Patel BAIL No. 28572 of 2025 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad