High Court · 2025

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was posted as Junior Property Clerk in Nagar Palika Parishad, Bareilly and as per allegation, he made a demand of bribe of Rs.8,000/- from the complainant to provide him N.O.C. for the purpose to open the meat shop and thereafter he was arrested red handed by the trap team while he was receiving bribe from the complainant but entire allegation made against applicant is totally false.

4. 7. He further submits admittedly being Junior Property Clerk, applicant was not having any authority to provide N.O.C. to the complainant and this authority was vested with Food Inspector and therefore, there was neither occasion for the applicant to make demand of bribe nor there was any occasion for the complainant to give bribe to him.

5. He further submits that even from the FIR, it reflects, recovery memo and other documents of the trap proceedings have not been prepared at spot and the same have been prepared at police station Civil Lines and this fact casts serious doubt on the entire trap proceedings.

6. He further submits that actually complainant is the son-in-law of brother-in-law of the applicant and a matrimonial dispute is pending between applicant and his wife and only due to this reason, he implicated him in the present matter with the connivance of trap team. He further submits, the fact that a matrimonial dispute is pending between applicant and his wife has been disclosed in para 16 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application.

7. He further submits that till trap service record of the applicant was unblemished and he is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 23.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant was apprehended red handed while he was receiving bribe from the complainant but could not dispute the fact that from the record, it reflects, the spot, where trap was made, was Nagar Palika Parishad premises but recovery memo and other documents of the trap proceedings have not been prepared there and the same were prepared at police station Civil Lines.

9. He further could not dispute the fact that as per allegation, applicant was asking for bribe from the complainant to provide N.O.C. to him for the purpose to open the meat shop but he was not having any authority to provide the same and this authority was vested with Food Inspector.

10. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 23.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

11. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.

12. However, as per allegation, applicant was posted as Junior Property Clerk in Nagar Palika Parishad, Bareilly and he made a demand of bribe from the complainant to provide him N.O.C. for the purpose to open the meat shop and thereafter he was arrested red handed by the trap team while he was receiving bribe from the complainant but it reflect, being Junior Property Clerk, he was not having any authority to provide N.O.C. to the complainant and this authority was vested with Food Inspector.

13. Further, from the FIR, it reflects, however alleged trap was made in the premises of Nagar Palika Praishad, Bareilly but recovery memo and other documents of the trap proceedings have not been prepared there and the same were prepared at police station Civil Lines. Considering this fact, this Court finds merit on the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that this fact casts serious doubt on the entire trap proceedings.

14. Further, till trap service record of the applicant was unblemished and he is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 23.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

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

17. Let the applicant- Mushahid Ali 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.

18. 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.

19. 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 :- 18.7.2025 Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was posted as Junior Property Clerk in Nagar Palika Parishad, Bareilly and as per allegation, he made a demand of bribe of Rs.8,000/- from the complainant to provide him N.O.C. for the purpose to open the meat shop and thereafter he was arrested red handed by the trap team while he was receiving bribe from the complainant but entire allegation made against applicant is totally false.

4. 7. He further submits admittedly being Junior Property Clerk, applicant was not having any authority to provide N.O.C. to the complainant and this authority was vested with Food Inspector and therefore, there was neither occasion for the applicant to make demand of bribe nor there was any occasion for the complainant to give bribe to him.

5. He further submits that even from the FIR, it reflects, recovery memo and other documents of the trap proceedings have not been prepared at spot and the same have been prepared at police station Civil Lines and this fact casts serious doubt on the entire trap proceedings.

6. He further submits that actually complainant is the son-in-law of brother-in-law of the applicant and a matrimonial dispute is pending between applicant and his wife and only due to this reason, he implicated him in the present matter with the connivance of trap team. He further submits, the fact that a matrimonial dispute is pending between applicant and his wife has been disclosed in para 16 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application.

7. He further submits that till trap service record of the applicant was unblemished and he is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 23.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant was apprehended red handed while he was receiving bribe from the complainant but could not dispute the fact that from the record, it reflects, the spot, where trap was made, was Nagar Palika Parishad premises but recovery memo and other documents of the trap proceedings have not been prepared there and the same were prepared at police station Civil Lines.

9. He further could not dispute the fact that as per allegation, applicant was asking for bribe from the complainant to provide N.O.C. to him for the purpose to open the meat shop but he was not having any authority to provide the same and this authority was vested with Food Inspector.

10. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 23.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

11. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.

12. However, as per allegation, applicant was posted as Junior Property Clerk in Nagar Palika Parishad, Bareilly and he made a demand of bribe from the complainant to provide him N.O.C. for the purpose to open the meat shop and thereafter he was arrested red handed by the trap team while he was receiving bribe from the complainant but it reflect, being Junior Property Clerk, he was not having any authority to provide N.O.C. to the complainant and this authority was vested with Food Inspector.

13. Further, from the FIR, it reflects, however alleged trap was made in the premises of Nagar Palika Praishad, Bareilly but recovery memo and other documents of the trap proceedings have not been prepared there and the same were prepared at police station Civil Lines. Considering this fact, this Court finds merit on the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that this fact casts serious doubt on the entire trap proceedings.

14. Further, till trap service record of the applicant was unblemished and he is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 23.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

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

17. Let the applicant- Mushahid Ali 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.

18. 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.

19. 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 :- 18.7.2025 Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad