SHASHIKANT SONKARversusSTATE OF U.P.

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
         CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16511 of 2026

Shashikant Sonkar
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)                   :   Manoj Kumar Dubey
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 Sri Uday Karan Saxena, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri
Manoj Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A.
for the State and perused the record.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that
applicant was the Village Development Officer and it is alleged that
applicant has demanded Rs. 10,000/- for approval of the bill amounting to
Rs. 99240/-. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant further
submits that subsequently trap team was constituted and applicant has
been caught with Rs. 10,000/- which the applicant has handed over to
another person. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that
applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. The maximum
punishment provided under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption
Act, 1988 is seven years and is triable by Magistrate concerned. The
applicant has no criminal history. Applicant is languishing in jail since
25.3.2026 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.
                                                         BAIL No. 16511 of 2026
                                2


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,
the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
The bail application is allowed.
                                                                                            BAIL No. 16511 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    12. Let the applicant-Shashikant Sonkar involved in Case Crime No. 01
                                    of 2026, under Section 7/12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as
                                    amended Act 2018, Police Station Anti Corruption, District Azamgarh 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 14, 2026
                                    VMA




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