Allahabad High Court
NEESHU TYAGIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKRAM D CHAUHAN
Holding
The Court held that the applicant made out a case for bail and therefore granted bail.
Summary
The applicant Neeshu Tyagi, driver of a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate, was arrested for demanding Rs 1 lac to influence a pending case and was charged under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He has been in custody since 30 March 2026 and has no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail but did not demonstrate any risk of flight, evidence tampering, or witness intimidation. Relying on the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception under Article 21 of the Constitution, and noting the absence of material adverse circumstances, the Court held that the applicant satisfied the criteria for bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in the absence of evidence of flight risk, tampering of evidence or witness intimidation
- Whether the State has discharged the burden of showing exceptional circumstances to deny bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- Prevention of Corruption Act
- Section 7
- Article 21
- corruption
- flight risk
- evidence tampering
- witness intimidation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16112 of 2026
Neeshu Tyagi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prem Prakash Yadav, Ram Ajor,
Siddharth Chaudhary
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.
1. Learned A.G.A. 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 the applicant is
the driver of Sub-Divisional Magistrate and it is alleged that the applicant
has demanded Rs.1 lac for disposal of a case pending before the Sub-
Divisional Magistrate. Subsequently, the trap team was constituted and
the applicant has been apprehended along with Rs.1 lac. Charge sheet has
been submitted in the present case. The maximum punishment provided
under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act is seven years. The
present case is triable by Magistrate. The applicant has no criminal
history. Applicant is languishing in jail since 30.3.2026 and in case he is
released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate
in the trial.
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 has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate
criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the
applicant for Bail.
BAIL No. 16112 of 2026
2
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 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
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,
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 Neeshu Tyagi involved in Case Crime No.099 of
2026, under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as Amended
by the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, Police Station
Khekara, District Baghpat be released on bail on furnishing a personal
BAIL No. 16112 of 2026
3
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 his 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.)
September 11, 2026
Bhaskar
Digitally signed by :-
BHASKAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…