Dinesh Chandra Somani, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainant has returned the amount of loan taken from the petitioner a long back, otherwise the petitioner never took any bribe from him and the same explanation was given by the petitioner on the spot. Learned counsel also submits that no work of complainant was pending with the petitioner, bill for payment of first instalment of subsidy was already sent to the treasury, the complainant is habitual of making complaints to the ACB. During arguments, learned counsel submitted a copy of FIR No.1/2005 Police Station, CPS, ACB lodged by the complainant. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is in custody since 06.04.2016, hence, he may be enlarged on bail.

3. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

4. Having considered the rival submissions of both the counsel, after perusing the case diary and material made available before us and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case which may otherwise affect the outcome of the case but looking to the explanation given by the pe