MAHENDRA KUMAR BHARGAV Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR. Sandeep Tandon with Mr. Mohd. Azim, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Nandan Arya, learned AGA for the State.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the applicant submitted that prosecution case against the applicant is that he was arrested by the team of Vigilance on 08.02.2010 from the office of Vidyut Vyapar Kendra, Bhopatwala Haridwar, while receiving illegal gratification of Rs. 1,00,000/-, in lieu of reducing the electricity consumption bill. He argued that the applicant is an Office Assistant II in the office of U.P.C.L. Hardwar and is not competent to reduce the bill amount. Therefore, taking money for that purpose by a clerk is unbelievable. He submitted that applicant is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that applicant is in jail since 08.02.2010. He also submitted that appellant is a government servant and there is no likelihood of his absconding in the event of his release on bail.