Allahabad High Court

1. Sri Shatrughan Yadav, 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 Pradeep Kumar Rai, learned Advocate, holding brief of Sri Shyam Lal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA, for the State.

3. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.03 of 2022, under Section 13(1)(b) and 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Satarkata Adhishthan Meerut Sector, District Meerut during pendency of the trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is a public servant and as per allegation his expenses were more than his known source of income but entire allegations levelled against the applicant are totally false.

5. He further submits that during investigation, Investigating Officer did not arrest the applicant, however, applicant fully cooperated with the investigation but now charge sheet has been filed and summons have been issued and, therefore, applicant is having apprehension that if he will appear before the court concerned then he will be sent to jail. 2 NABAIL No. 10037 of 2025

6. He further submits that as during investigation applicant was not arrested, therefore, after submission of charge sheet there is no occasion to send him jail.

7. He further submits that after submission of charge sheet there is no requirement of custodial interrogation of the applicant. He next submits that even from the FIR it reflects that check period was from 2007 to 2011 but FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2022, i.e., after more than a decade.

8. He further submits that however, charge sheet in the present matter has been filed on 26.6.2024 but summons could never be served upon the applicant and, therefore, applicant could not earlier approach the Court and when he came to know about the pendency of the present matter then he immediately filed anticipatory bail application before the court concerned but his anticipatory bail application has been dismissed.

9. He next submits that however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case is of the year 2014 and in that case applicant is on anticipatory bail.

10. He further submits that therefore considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of the trial.

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, it appears to be a case of disproportionate income and as per allegation, applicant was public servant and his expenses were more than 19% of his income but it appears that during investigation Investigating Officer did not propose his arrest and without his arrest he submitted charge sheet in the matter and there is no allegation that during investigation applicant did not cooperate with the investigation. 3 NABAIL No. 10037 of 2025

14. Further, however, it appears that charge sheet in the present matter has been filed in June, 2024 but applicant has explained his conduct in paragraph-25 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant anticipatory bail application and averment made by him cannot be completely brushed aside.

15. Further, as charge sheet has been filed, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required and apprehension of arrest raised by applicant can also not be ruled out. Further, even from the record it reflects that FIR of the present case has been lodged after more than a decade .

16.Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case was of the year 2014 and in that case he is on anticipatory bail.

17. 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.

18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail anticipatory application is allowed.

19. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Sunil Kumar Gautam 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; 4 NABAIL No. 10037 of 2025 (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;

20. 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.

21. 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. December 2, 2025 SKM (Sameer Jain,J.)

1. Sri Shatrughan Yadav, 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 Pradeep Kumar Rai, learned Advocate, holding brief of Sri Shyam Lal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA, for the State.

3. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.03 of 2022, under Section 13(1)(b) and 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Satarkata Adhishthan Meerut Sector, District Meerut during pendency of the trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is a public servant and as per allegation his expenses were more than his known source of income but entire allegations levelled against the applicant are totally false.

5. He further submits that during investigation, Investigating Officer did not arrest the applicant, however, applicant fully cooperated with the investigation but now charge sheet has been filed and summons have been issued and, therefore, applicant is having apprehension that if he will appear before the court concerned then he will be sent to jail. 2 NABAIL No. 10037 of 2025

6. He further submits that as during investigation applicant was not arrested, therefore, after submission of charge sheet there is no occasion to send him jail.

7. He further submits that after submission of charge sheet there is no requirement of custodial interrogation of the applicant. He next submits that even from the FIR it reflects that check period was from 2007 to 2011 but FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2022, i.e., after more than a decade.

8. He further submits that however, charge sheet in the present matter has been filed on 26.6.2024 but summons could never be served upon the applicant and, therefore, applicant could not earlier approach the Court and when he came to know about the pendency of the present matter then he immediately filed anticipatory bail application before the court concerned but his anticipatory bail application has been dismissed.

9. He next submits that however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case is of the year 2014 and in that case applicant is on anticipatory bail.

10. He further submits that therefore considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of the trial.

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, it appears to be a case of disproportionate income and as per allegation, applicant was public servant and his expenses were more than 19% of his income but it appears that during investigation Investigating Officer did not propose his arrest and without his arrest he submitted charge sheet in the matter and there is no allegation that during investigation applicant did not cooperate with the investigation. 3 NABAIL No. 10037 of 2025

14. Further, however, it appears that charge sheet in the present matter has been filed in June, 2024 but applicant has explained his conduct in paragraph-25 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant anticipatory bail application and averment made by him cannot be completely brushed aside.

15. Further, as charge sheet has been filed, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required and apprehension of arrest raised by applicant can also not be ruled out. Further, even from the record it reflects that FIR of the present case has been lodged after more than a decade .

16.Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case was of the year 2014 and in that case he is on anticipatory bail.

17. 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.

18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail anticipatory application is allowed.

19. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Sunil Kumar Gautam 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; 4 NABAIL No. 10037 of 2025 (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;

20. 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.

21. 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. December 2, 2025 SKM (Sameer Jain,J.)