HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30073 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed by the State and rejoinder affidavit filed by the applicant are taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Satendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 07 of 2025, under Sections 7 P.C. Act, Police Station Anti Corruption, District Saharanpur during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for applicant submits, applicant was contractual employee in the Electricity Department and as per allegation for forwarding the application of the complainant for new electric connection he made demand of bribe from him and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the trap team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 15,000/- but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false. 5. He further submits, being contractual employee applicant was not authorized even to forward the application of the complainant and authority of the same was vested with Junior Engineer and this fact shows that on the basis of false allegation complainant implicated the applicant in the present matter with the connivance of trap team. 6. He further submits, even from the FIR it reflects, after the alleged trap applicant has taken to the police station and at police station his hands were washed and at police station the alleged recovered bribe money was sealed and at police station recovery memo was prepared and these facts casts Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Adhar Yadav, Satendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shubham Panwar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) serious doubt on the trap proceedings. 7. He further submits, investigation of the case has been completed and applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.06.2025 i.e. for last three months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits, applicant made demand of bribe from the complainant and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the trap team but could not dispute the fact that applicant was contractual employee. 9. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that from the record it reflects, after the alleged trap applicant has taken to the police station and at police station his hands were washed and at police station even the alleged recovered bribe money was seized and thereafter at police station recovery memo was prepared. 10. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that investigation of the case has been completed and applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.06.2025 i.e. for last three months. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. As per allegation, applicant was working in the Electricity Department and he made demand of bribe from the complainant for forwarding his application for new electric connection and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the trap team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 15,000/- but it reflects, after the alleged trap applicant has taken to the police station and at police station his hands were washed and thereafter the alleged recovered bribe money was seized and sealed and thereafter recovery memo of the trap was prepared. Considering these facts, the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that these facts casts serious doubt on the trap proceedings cannot be ruled out. 13. Further, investigation of the case has been completed and applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.06.2025 i.e. for last three months. 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 BAIL No. 30073 of 2025 2 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. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant - Shubham Panwar 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 24, 2025 AK Pandey BAIL No. 30073 of 2025 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad