Shailesh vs State of U.P.

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 06 of 2025, under Sections 7 of the P.C. Act, Police Station Anti Corruption Gorakhpur, District ACO U.P. during pendency of the trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant was posted as Kanoongo and as per allegation to submit his report relating to measurement of the property of the complainant he made demand of bribe of Rs. 10,000/from him and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the trap team and bribe money was also recovered from his possession but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false.

¶11

He further submits, from the FIR it reflects, after the alleged trap applicant has taken to the police station and at police station recovery of the alleged bribe was made and thereafter bribe money was sealed and at police station the hands of the applicant and complainant were washed and at police station recovery memo of the alleged trap was prepared. He next submits, considering these facts, the entire trap proceedings becomes doubtful.

¶12

He next submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and investigation of the case has been completed and applicant is in jail since

¶13

BAIL No. 38858 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

30.08.2025 i.e. for last more than three months.

¶16

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits, applicant was Kanoongo and he firstly made demand of bribe and thereafter he accepted the bribe and he was apprehended red handed by the trap team and even bribe money was recovered from his possession but learned AGA could not dispute the fact that neither hands of the applicant and complainant were washed at the place where trap was made nor even bribe money, which was recovered was sealed at spot and all these formalities were completed at police station.

¶17

Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that even the recovery memo of the trap has been prepared at police station. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter applicant is in jail since 30.08.2025 i.e. for last more than three months and investigation of the case has been completed.

¶18

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

¶19

However, as per allegation, applicant was Kanoongo and to submit his report relating to measurement of the property of the complainant, he made demand of bribe of Rs. 10,000/- from him and thereafter he was apprehended red handed by the trap team and even bribe money of Rs. 10,000/- were recovered from his possession but it reflects, neither hands of the applicant and complainant were washed at the place where trap was made nor alleged bribe money, which was recovered was sealed at spot and it appears, all these formalities have been completed at police station. Considering these facts the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that entire trap proceedings appears to be doubtful, cannot be ruled out at this stage.

¶20

Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter applicant is in jail since 30.08.2025 i.e. for last more than three months and investigation of the case has been completed.

¶21

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

¶22

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed

¶23

BAIL No. 38858 of 2025

¶24

3

¶25

above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶26

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

¶27

Let the applicant - Shailesh 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:-

¶28

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶29

(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.

¶30

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶31

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.

¶32

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.

¶33

December 2, 2025 AK Pandey

¶34

(Sameer Jain,J.)

¶35

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shailesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rajesh Kumar vs State of U.P.

Suresh Prakash Gautam vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kashyap vs State of Up and Another

Rub Nawaz vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankur vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others