HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3841 of 2026 Rajiv Kumar Srivastava .....Applicant(s) Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Himanshu Suryavanshi, Aishwarya Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 28 HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. 1. Heard Sri Purnendu Chakravarty, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Himanshu Suryavanshi and Aishwarya Saxena learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. This is first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant who is involved in FIR/Crime Crime No.0002/2026, under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station- Ayodhya Sector (Vigilance Establishment), District- U.P. Vigilance Establishment, Ayodhya.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no particular date, time and place as to when alleged demand was made by the applicant, making very general allegations in the complaint dated 21.04.2026 by the informant. The applicant has no role for the issuance of birth certificates. The Verification Officer did not verify from the portal of birth certificate, U.P. Government. There is no compliance of Section 105 BNSS and the offence is punishable upto 7 years. There is no independent witness to support the alleged bribe transaction It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 24.04.2026 having no previous criminal history and there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Hence, the applicant may be granted bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. BAIL No. 3841 of 2026 2 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record and considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 24.04.2026 having no previous criminal history and without entering into the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant Rajiv Kumar Srivastava be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, either personally or through his counsel. Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed. 8. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. May 29, 2026 Anand/- (Rajeev Bharti,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench