HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30739 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA, for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.322 of 2025, under Sections 140(2) and 308 (6) BNS and Section 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Patiyali, District Kasganj during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is the Police Constable and as per allegation he along with other Police Personnel extracted money of Rs. Three Lacs from the informant but entire allegations levelled against the applicant are totally false. 4. He further submits that as per allegation applicant and another Police Personnel forcibly lifted the informant on 20.7.2025 and thereafter on the same day in the late night he was released but FIR of the present case was lodged on 5.8.2025, i.e., after two weeks and this delay in lodging the FIR itself suggests that it is based on false facts. 5. He further submits that even being petty Police Constable applicant was not having any concern with the alleged demand of bribe and even from the FIR it reflects that senior police officers were making demand of bribe. 6. He further submits that actually informant used to receive stolen Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pawan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) articles and therefore, when police tried to interrogate him with regard to one case in which one J.P.Sharma was an accused then after 20 days he lodged FIR of the present case on the basis of false allegation. 7. He further submits that applicant is responsible Police Constable and till the present matter his service record was unblemished. 8. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 6.8.2025, i.e.for the last more than one month. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that being Police Constable applicant misused his position along with other police personnel and they not only forcibly lifted the informant but also received bribe from him but he could not dispute the fact that applicant is only Police Constable and there is delay of two weeks in lodging the FIR of the present case. 10. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that except bald allegation of demand of bribe and giving the same, there is no cogent evidence in this regard on record. 11. He further could not dispute the fact that as per applicant and other police personnel, informant used to receive stolen articles and his name was disclosed by one accused of another case, namely, J.P.Sharma. 12. He further could not dispute the fact that apart from the present case, applicant is not having any other previous criminal history. 13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 14. However, as per allegation applicant was Police Constable and he along with other Police Personnel forcibly lifted the informant from his shop and thereafter they made demand of bribe and under their pressure he gave Rs. Three Lacs to the Police Personnel but it reflects that there is delay of two weeks in lodging the FIR. 15. Further, except bald and verbal allegation, there is no cogent evidence which can suggest that informant gave bribe money to the Police Personnel. BAIL No. 30739 of 2025 2 16. Further, applicant is only Police Constable and even as per FIR bribe money was being demanded by the Senior Police Officers. 17. Further, even from the record it reflects that informant was Jeweller and as per Police Personnel he used to receive stolen articles and considering this fact the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant with regard to false implication of the applicant, cannot be ruled out. 18. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history to his credit and he is in jail since 6.8.2025, i.e., for the last more than one month. 19. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 20. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 21. Let the applicant-Pawan 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. 22. 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. 23. 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 BAIL No. 30739 of 2025 3 the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 9, 2025 SKM BAIL No. 30739 of 2025 4 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad