Order 100926ba1171.26 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [BA] NO.1171 OF 2026. Janardhan Lalu Chavan -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra. Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Shri P. Naidu, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms S.N. Thakur, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State. Shri M.N. Ali, Advocate Assisting Prosecution. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 10, 2026. Heard. 2. The learned Counsel for the applicant seeks permission to correct surname of the applicant. Permission granted. Necessary correction be carried out forthwith. 3. The applicant came to be arrested in connection with Crime No.769/2026 registered with Pusad City Police Station, District Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 4. The first information report came to be lodged by Rgd. 2026:BHC-NAG:12071 Order 100926ba1171.26 2 Sanjay Shinde, Police Official, ACB Department, alleging that on 13.08.2026 a complaint was received against a public servant as regards demand of bribe for passing bills of the tender. Trap was led on 14.08.2026 and the applicant was caught red handed accepting Rs.4 lakhs, and therefore, the report. 5. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the maximum punishment provided for the alleged offence is 7 years. He further submits that the allegations against the applicant are that he has demanded and accepted bribe amount of Rs.4 lakhs. The allegations in the first information report goes to show that the original complainant had lodged the complaint with the informant alleging that he got tender of Rs.20 lakhs and for clearing the bills, the applicant demanded an amount of Rs.4 lakhs. Trap was led, demand was verified and applicant was caught red handed while accepting the bribe amount. The learned Counsel submits that even if the allegations are taken at its face value, further custodial interrogation is not required, since all the documentary evidence is already collected by the investigating officer. He Rgd. Order 100926ba1171.26 3 further submits that, so far as the cash amount of more than Rs.14 lakhs which was seized from the house of the applicant is concerned, that amount was already accounted, which can be gathered from the Income Tax Returns, as his wife and son are doing business. In such circumstances, further custody of applicant is not required, and no purpose would be served by keeping him behind bars, he therefore, prayed for grant of bail. 6. The learned A.P.P. for the non-applicant and learned Counsel assisting prosecution vehemently opposed the application by submitting that the applicant demanded an amount of Rs.4 lakhs, and has accepted the same. Proper procedure was followed and the conversation was also recorded in voice recorder during the trap and further the applicant was caught red handed accepting the bribe amount and therefore, ingredients of Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act has been fully satisfied, as there is demand and acceptance. They further submit that unaccounted cash amount of more than Rs.14 lakhs has been found during house search of the applicant. Considering the fact that the applicant is working as an Executive Engineer, MSEDCL, he Rgd. Order 100926ba1171.26 4 does not deserve to be granted bail. 7. Upon consideration of the rival submissions of the parties, prima facie it appears that there is strong material against the applicant. It is further to be noted that the applicant has demanded the amount and has also accepted the same. From the contents of first information report, it appears that the original informant got a tender of Rs.20 lakhs, out of which the applicant demanded 20% of the said amount i.e. Rs.4 lakhs for clearing the bills. Though the allegations appears to be serious in nature, however, the fact remains that the maximum punishment provided is of 7 years. It is further to be noted that the applicant is behind bars since 15.08.2026, and has cooperated with the investigation, as he has given voice samples. In such circumstances, I am of the view that no purpose would be served by keeping the applicant behind bars, and therefore, I am inclined to grant him bail by imposing stringent condition, hence, the following order. ORDER (i) Criminal Application is allowed and disposed of. Rgd. Order 100926ba1171.26 5 (ii) The applicant /accused Janardhan Lalu Chavan be released on regular bail in connection with Crime No.769/2026 registered with Pusad City Police Station, District Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount. (iii) The accused shall not enter within the territorial jurisdiction of Pusad City, except for attending the trial. (iv) The accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the evidence. (v) The accused shall provide his residential address and cell number to Police Station concerned and shall not change his place of residence without prior intimation to the Investigating Agency. (vi) The accused shall attend each and every date regularly. If he fails to attend the trial for one single date, or fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions, his default would entail the State to ask for cancellation of bail. (vii) The above observations are prima facie in nature, and restricted for the purpose of deciding this application. The Trial Court shall not get itself influenced by said observations, Rgd. Order 100926ba1171.26 6 during the course of trial. (viii) Misc. Applications, if any, are also disposed of. JUDGE Rgd. Signed by: R.G. Dhuriya (RGD) Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 11/09/2026 15:07:15