HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33397 of 2024 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Satish Sharma, 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. 21 of 2024, under Sections 7/13(1)B, 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Anti Corruption, District Bareilly, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was sub Inspector in U.P. Police and as per allegation dispute of the complainant was pending with some other and when his opponent moved an application against him then C.O. Sahaswan, Badaun started conducting inquiry and on 9.7.2024 applicant started making demand of bribe from him to exonerate him and thereafter he was apprehended by the trap team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 10,000/- from the complainant but entire allegations levelled against the applicant are totally false. 5. He further submitted that even from the FIR of the present case it reflects that on the application moved by the opponent of the complainant C.O. concerned was conducting inquiry and Inquiry was not pending before the applicant, therefore, there was no reason for applicant to make demand of bribe and this fact clearly suggests that on the basis of false allegations applicant has been implicated in the present matter with the connivance of trap team. 6. He further submitted that till the date of lodgement of the FIR of the present case, service record of the applicant was unblemished and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since July, 2024 i.e. for more than a year. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajiv Sisodia, Satish Sharma, Shashank Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. S.I. Dharamveer Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) was sub Inspector of Police and he was public servant and he misused his position and he not only made demand of bribe of Rs. 10,000/- from the complainant but bribe money was also recovered from his possession but he could not dispute the fact that as per the complainant, applicant was making demand of bribe to exonerate the complainant in a case, inquiry of which, was conducted by C.O. concerned and applicant was not inquiry/investigating officer of that case. 8. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter, applicant is in jail for last more than a year. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. However, as per allegation, applicant was sub Inspector in the police and he made demand of bribe from the complainant and thereafter he was apprehended by the trap team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 10,000/- from him but it reflects as per complainant applicant was making demand of bribe to exonerate him from a case which was initiated by his opponent and inquiry of the same was pending before C.O. concerned and from the record it could not reflect that applicant was conducting the inquiry. Considering this fact the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there was no occasion for the applicant to make demand of bribe, cannot be rule out at this stage. 11. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and till the FIR of the present case his service record appears to be unblemished and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since July, 2024 i.e. for last more than a year. 12. 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 purposes. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicant-S.I. Dharamveer Singh, 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 BAIL No. 33397 of 2024 2 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. 16. 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. 17. 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 17, 2025 Ankita BAIL No. 33397 of 2024 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad