HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30126 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed by the State-respondent and rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant are taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Rajeev Upadhyay and Randhir Jain, learned counsel for the applicant; and Shri Vijay Bahadur Maurya, learned AGA for the State- respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.10 of 2025, under Sections 7, 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Anti Corruption, District Varanasi, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was police sub- inspector in police department and as per allegation, co-accused Abhaynath Tiwari was I.O. of a case, in which complainant was one of the accused and to exonerate him, he made demand of bribe from him and thereafter, when complainant on his instructions, arrived at a particular place to give bribe to him then on his instructions, he gave bribe money to the applicant and thereafter, applicant and co-accused Abhaynath Tiwari both were apprehended red handed by the trap team but entire allegations made against applicant are false. 5. He further submits that even from the FIR, it could not be reflected that applicant made any demand of bribe. He further submits, as applicant was not the I.O. of the case, in which complainant was one of the accused therefore, there was no occasion for him even to accept the bribe from the complainant and it appears, principal accused in the present matter is co- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pramod Kumar Yadav, Rajeev Upadhyay, Randhir Jain Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shakti Singh Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) accused Abhaynath Tiwari. 6. He further submits that investigation of the present case has been completed. 7. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 28.06.2025 i.e. for last almost three months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. However, as per allegation, bribe money of Rs.50,000/- were recovered from the possession of the applicant but it reflects, he neither made any demand of bribe nor he himself accepted the bribe money from the complainant. It reflects, on the instructions of co-accused Abhaynath Tiwari, he received bribe money from the complainant in his presence. 11. Further, investigation of the present case has been completed. 12. Further, applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 28.06.2025 i.e. for last almost three months. 13. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail application should not be dismissed either for preventive or for punitive purpose. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant- Shakti Singh Yadav 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 BAIL No. 30126 of 2025 2 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. 17. 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. 18. 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 Zafar BAIL No. 30126 of 2025 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad