Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 91246 (ALL)

RAVINDRA KUMAR v. State of UP

BAIL/34177/2024 · 2025-07-07

Sameer Jain

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:109156 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34177 of 2024 Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava,Amrita Singh,Pradeep Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.B. Singh, learned AGA for the State- respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 360 of 2024, under Sections 7, 13(1)(B), 13(2), 12 Anti Corruption Act & Section 61 BNS, Police Station- Dhampur, District- Bijnor, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is a private person and he is not the government servant and he worked in Electricity Department on contractual basis and as per allegation, he made demand of bribe from complainant for electric connection along with co-accused Vikas Kumar and he was arrested along with co-accused Vikas red handed by the trap-team while he was receiving bribe of Rs. 15,000/- from the complainant but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false. 4. He further submitted that being private person and contractual employee, applicant was not having any authority to provide electric connection to the complainant, therefore, there was absolutely no occasion for him to give bribe to applicant. 5. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 17.07.2024 i.e. for last almost a year. 6. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant was apprehended red handed by the trap- team while he was receiving bribe from the complainant but could not dispute the fact that applicant was a private person and he was not the government servant and was not having any authority to provide electric connection. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter for last almost a year. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 8. However, as per allegation, applicant made demand of bribe from the complainant along with co-accused Vikas for the purpose to provide electric connection to him but it reflects, applicant was a private person and he was not the government servant and he worked in Electricity Department on contractual basis and authority to provide electric connection was not vested with him. 9. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 17.07.2024 i.e. for last one year. 10. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty, an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application of an accused should not be dismissed for punitive purpose. 11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant- Ravindra 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. 14. 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. 15. 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. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad