HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9462 of 2026 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA and perused the material available on record. 2. The present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Arjun Sirohi in Case Crime No. 0247 of 2026 converted Case Crime No.17 of 2026, under Section 7/12 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amended Act 2018), Police Station Sikarpur, District Bulandshahr, converted Police Station A.C.O., District Meerut. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is working on the post of Secretary, Krishi Mandi Utpadan Samiti and it is alleged that in respect of contract a sum of Rs.1,20,400/- when the complainant visited the office of applicant, applicant has demanded a sum of Rs.10,000/- for release of cheque. Subsequently when the complaint was made to the Anti Corruption, then the Anti Corruption verified the aforesaid fact and subsequently co-accused has been apprehended along with Rs.10,000/-. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that complainant was not the owner of the contract and as such, there was no question of releasing the cheque. It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and has no concern with the present matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further argued that applicant's case is squarely covered under Section 482 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atal Bihari Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Arjun Sirohi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) BNSS. No prima facie case is made out against the applicant. If the applicant is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty and cooperate with the investigation. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest by the police any time. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer. 5. It is to be seen that in the present case there are serious allegations of demand of bribe with the assistance of co-accused. The amount of Rs.10,000/- has been recovered by the trap team. It is not a case where the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case although learned counsel for applicant tried to submit that when the applicant denied to give the cheque to the complainant as he was not the owner of the contract then the First Information Report was lodged. Such defence raised by applicant is wholly untenable as there is no evidence in respect of same and the amount has been recovered. 6. In view of aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed. September 14, 2026 D. Tamang NABAIL No. 9462 of 2026 2 (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad