JUDGMENT : (Alok Kumar Verma, J.) : The present Application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed for regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No. 321 of 2022, registered at police station Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal. 2. The present applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 409, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 3. As per the prosecution case, in the enquiry conducted by the Nagar Nigam, Kotdwar, it was found that illegal payment of Rs. 96,34,860 was made from the accounts of the Nagar Nigam, Kotdwar. Therefore, a First Information Report was lodged against the present applicant, his brother Pankaj Rawat and other four co-accused. 4. Mr. Vibhav Saini, the Investigating Officer, is present in-person. 5. Heard Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel with Mr. P.C. Petshali, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State. 6. Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate, contended that the applicant was a contractor in the Nagar Nigam, Kotdwar. The amount was given to him in lieu of the work done by him as a contractor. In support of this submission, a letter issued by the Nagar Nigam, Kotdwar (annexure no. 1 to the supplementary affidavit dated 12.05.2024) has been filed on behalf of the applicant. 7. Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate, further contended that the applicant has not received any illegal payment. He has been falsely implicated because his brother Pankaj Singh Rawat was posted as a clerk in the office of Nagar Nigam, Kotdwar. Applicant is not a previous convict. He is in judicial custody since 02.03.2023. He is a permanent resident of District Pauri Garhwal, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, one co-accused Kuldeep Singh has already been granted regular bail by this Court. 8. On the other hand, Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application. However, he has conceded that the applicant is not a previous convict. 9. It has been submitted by the Investigating Officer that false cheques were issued to the applicant. However, he has submitted that the said letter, filed on behalf of the applicant (annexure no. 1 to the supplementary affidavit) is not false. 10. However, he has conceded that the applicant is not a previous convict. 9. It has been submitted by the Investigating Officer that false cheques were issued to the applicant. However, he has submitted that the said letter, filed on behalf of the applicant (annexure no. 1 to the supplementary affidavit) is not false. 10. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. 11. The Bail Application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant – Neeraj Rawat be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions:- i) Applicant shall attend the Trial Court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment; ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case. (iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Trial Court. 13. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.