HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7251 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA, for the State, apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off. 2. Heard Sri Dileep Kumar, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri Girijesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA, for the State. 3. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.0003 of 2024, under Sections 7/7A, 12, 13(1)(b) and 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120B IPC, Police Station Anti Corruption, District Azamgarh during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that however, FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and co-accused Manoj Kumar Srivastava under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act but even as per the complaint moved by complainant applicant did not make demand of bribe from him. 5. He further submits that there is also no allegation that applicant received the bribe money and the allegation of receiving the bribe money is against co-accused Manoj Kumar Srivastava. He next submits that it appears that when co-accused Manoj Kumar Srivatava was arrested then he disclosed the name of the applicant and, therefore, applicant has been Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Grijesh Tiwari, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Manoj Kumar Mishra .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) made accused in the present matter on the basis of the statement of co- accused Manoj Kumar Srivatava. 6. He further submits that when applicant challenged the FIR of the present case before this Court vide Criminal Misc.Writ Petition No. 3877 of 2024 then after considering the entire facts Division Bench of this Court on 2.4.2024 was pleased to stay the arrest of the applicant till the submission of police report. 7. He further submits that now charge sheet has been filed and there is no allegation that during investigation applicant misused the liberty granted by Division Bench of this Court. 8. He further submits that even after submission of charge sheet custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. 9. He further submits, applicant is having apprehension that if he will appear before the court concerned, then he will be sent to jail. 10. He further submits that however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of two other cases but his criminal antecedents have been explained in the instant application and out of two cases in on case final report has been submitted and in another case his arrest has been stayed by Division Bench of this Court like the present matter. 11. Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, record suggests that on 19.2.2024 FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and co-accused Manoj Kumar Srivatava but it reflects that co-accused Manoj Kumar Srivastava is the principal accused and after considering entire facts in detail Division Bench of this Court during investigation stayed the arrest of the applicant and there is no allegation that applicant did not cooperate during investigation. NABAIL No. 7251 of 2025 2 14. Further, now charge sheet has been filed and court concerned has taken the cognizance and after submission of charge sheet it appears, custodial interrogation of applicant is not required. 15. Further, apprehension of arrest raised by applicant cannot be ruled out. 16. Further, apart from the present case, however, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases but it reflects that out of two cases in one case final report has been submitted and in one another case arrest of the applicant has been stayed by Division Bench of this Court. 18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial. 19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail anticipatory application is allowed. 20. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Manoj Kumar Mishra involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of the trial case on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court concerned with the conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (ii) that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; (iii) that the applicant shall not temper with the evidence during the trial; (iv) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; (v) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; NABAIL No. 7251 of 2025 3 21. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants. 22. It is made clear that the observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 8, 2025 SKM NABAIL No. 7251 of 2025 4 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad