High Court · 2025

1. Shri Rajan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant submits that name of the applicant has been mentioned in the memo of the bail application as 'Mukand Madhav Tiwari Alias Madhav Tiwari' and there is spelling mistake in his name and his actual name is 'Mukund Madhav Tiwari Alias Madhav Tiwari' and when applicant came to know about this fact then by moving application, he got corrected the bail rejection order, which has been annexed alongwith supplementary affidavit dated 21.04.2025 and therefore, he may be permitted to make necessary correction in the name of the applicant in memo of instant bail application.

2. Learned A.G.A. is having no objection.

3. In view of the above, learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to make necessary correction in the name of the applicant in the memo of instant bail application.

4. Heard Shri Rajan Mishra & Shri Manish Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Santosh Nigam, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

5. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.01 of 2024, under Sections 7, 13(1)(B), 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Farah (amended Police Station Anti Corruption, Agra, A.C.O., U.P.), District Mathura, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was a private person and he was a Lineman in the Electricity Department on contractual basis and as per allegation, complainant involved in committing theft of electricity and applicant made a demand of bribe from him by stating that if he will not give bribe to him then he will lodge FIR against him and thereafter applicant was arrested red handed while he was receiving bribe of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant but entire allegation made against applicant is totally false.

7. He further submits that being Lineman on contractual basis, applicant was not having any authority to lodge FIR against the complainant and this authority was vested with Junior Engineer and therefore, there was no occasion for the complainant to give bribe to the applicant.

8. He further submits that actually complainant used to commit theft of electricity and when applicant warned him then he with the connivance of the trap team implicated him in the present matter.

9. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 28.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant was apprehended red handed while he was receiving bribe of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant and he also made demand of bribe from him but could not dispute the fact applicant was a Lineman on contractual basis and he was not authorized to lodge the FIR against the complainant, who was committing theft of electricity, for which demand of bribe was allegedly being made by the applicant.

11. 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 28.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

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

13. However, as per allegation, complainant indulged in commission of theft of electricity and applicant, who was Lineman on contractual basis in Electricity Department told him if he will not give bribe to him then he will lodge FIR against him and thereafter when complainant was giving bribe to him then he was arrested red handed by the trap team but it reflects, authority to lodge FIR against the complainant was not vested with the applicant and this authority was vested with Junior Engineer.

14. Further, even from the record, it reflects, complainant was the person, who was on fault and used to commit theft of electricity.

15. Further, applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 28.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

16. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose.

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

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

19. Let the applicant- Mukund Madhav Tiwari Alias Madhav Tiwari 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.

20. 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.

21. 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

1. Shri Rajan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant submits that name of the applicant has been mentioned in the memo of the bail application as 'Mukand Madhav Tiwari Alias Madhav Tiwari' and there is spelling mistake in his name and his actual name is 'Mukund Madhav Tiwari Alias Madhav Tiwari' and when applicant came to know about this fact then by moving application, he got corrected the bail rejection order, which has been annexed alongwith supplementary affidavit dated 21.04.2025 and therefore, he may be permitted to make necessary correction in the name of the applicant in memo of instant bail application.

2. Learned A.G.A. is having no objection.

3. In view of the above, learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to make necessary correction in the name of the applicant in the memo of instant bail application.

4. Heard Shri Rajan Mishra & Shri Manish Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Santosh Nigam, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

5. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.01 of 2024, under Sections 7, 13(1)(B), 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Farah (amended Police Station Anti Corruption, Agra, A.C.O., U.P.), District Mathura, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was a private person and he was a Lineman in the Electricity Department on contractual basis and as per allegation, complainant involved in committing theft of electricity and applicant made a demand of bribe from him by stating that if he will not give bribe to him then he will lodge FIR against him and thereafter applicant was arrested red handed while he was receiving bribe of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant but entire allegation made against applicant is totally false.

7. He further submits that being Lineman on contractual basis, applicant was not having any authority to lodge FIR against the complainant and this authority was vested with Junior Engineer and therefore, there was no occasion for the complainant to give bribe to the applicant.

8. He further submits that actually complainant used to commit theft of electricity and when applicant warned him then he with the connivance of the trap team implicated him in the present matter.

9. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 28.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant was apprehended red handed while he was receiving bribe of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant and he also made demand of bribe from him but could not dispute the fact applicant was a Lineman on contractual basis and he was not authorized to lodge the FIR against the complainant, who was committing theft of electricity, for which demand of bribe was allegedly being made by the applicant.

11. 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 28.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

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

13. However, as per allegation, complainant indulged in commission of theft of electricity and applicant, who was Lineman on contractual basis in Electricity Department told him if he will not give bribe to him then he will lodge FIR against him and thereafter when complainant was giving bribe to him then he was arrested red handed by the trap team but it reflects, authority to lodge FIR against the complainant was not vested with the applicant and this authority was vested with Junior Engineer.

14. Further, even from the record, it reflects, complainant was the person, who was on fault and used to commit theft of electricity.

15. Further, applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 28.09.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months.

16. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose.

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

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

19. Let the applicant- Mukund Madhav Tiwari Alias Madhav Tiwari 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.

20. 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.

21. 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