RAJESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
         CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15478 of 2026

Rajesh Kumar
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Mayank Chandra, Pranav Tiwary, Sunil
                                Kumar Yadav, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 73
                 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

1. Learned A.G.A. for the State submits that instructions have been
received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on
merits.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the record.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is the
Junior Engineer in the electricity department and it is alleged that
applicant had demanded Rs.70,000/- from the complainant for
compounding of the offence although notice was issued by the department
for compounding of Rs. 24,948/-. Learned counsel for the applicant
further submits that subsequently co-accused Jay Prakash has been
trapped with Rs. 40,000/- which is alleged to have been received by the
co-accused at the behest of the applicant. Learned counsel for the
applicant further submits that it is highly improbable that compoundable
of Rs.25,948/- any person would pay 40 to 70 thousand rupees. The
applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. The co-accused, Jay
Prakash @ Munnesh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court by
order dated 23.4.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.
12681 of 2026. The applicant has no criminal history. Applicant is
languishing in jail since 22.1.2026 and in case he is released on bail, he
will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
                                                         BAIL No. 15478 of 2026
                                2


4. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not
dispute factual matrix of the case.

5. Learned AGA for the State has not brought any fact or circumstances to
indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would
disentitle the applicant for Bail.

6. It is not the case of the State that the applicant has not cooperated in the
investigation or proceedings before the trial court.

7. The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well
recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article
21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex
Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51. Learned AGA for the State has not
shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail
to the applicant.

8. No material, facts or circumstances has been shown by learned AGA
for the State that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses
or the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would
intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert
justice or tamper with the evidence.

9. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the
attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or
circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or
thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of
repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown
by learned AGA for the State.

10. Learned AGA for the State has not shown any material or
circumstances that the accused/applicant is not entitled to bail in larger
interests of the public or State.

11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence,
evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for
the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
                                                                                            BAIL No. 15478 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
                                    The bail application is allowed.

                                    12. Let the applicant-Rajesh Kumar involved in Case Crime No. 0001 of
                                    2026, under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police
                                    Station Anti Corruption Agra, District Agra be released on bail on
                                    furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the
                                    satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

                                    i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

                                    ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

                                    iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed,
                                    unless personal presence is exempted and/or the applicant shall make
                                    himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when
                                    required.

                                    iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of
                                    which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is
                                    suspected.

                                    v. 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.

                                    vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of
                                    the Court.

                                    vii. In the event, the applicant changes residential address, the applicant
                                    shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing.

                                    13. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall
                                    be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.



                                                                                      (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)
                                    May 7, 2026
                                    VMA




Digitally signed by :-
VISHWA MOHAN ARORA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad