The court emphasized granting bail based on progress of investigation and necessity for custody, incorporating conditions to ensure compliance and attendance.

ORDER

Dated this the 3^rd day of March, 2026 This bail application has been filed under Section

483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023, seeking regular bail and the petitioner is the 1^st accused in Crime No. V.C. 1/2026/ALP registered for the offences punishable under Sections 7 (b) and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 as amended in 2018 [hereinafter referred as ‘P.C. Act’ for short] and under Section 61 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023, by the accused.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor, in detail. Perused the relevant materials available.

3. In this matter, the prosecution case is that, the 1^st accused, while working as the Motor Vehicle Inspector (MVI) at the Sup Regional Transport Office, Cherthala and such being a public servant, abused his official position and demanded illegal gratification of Rs.300/- and Rs.400/- for two wheeler and light motor vehicle respectively from driving school owners through the 2^nd accused, who has been working as his agent, as a reward to qualify the candidates in the driving test sponsored by the respective driving schools. In consequence thereof, on 09.01.2026, the 1^st accused demanded Rs.2,500/- from the wife of the defacto complainant as a reward for passing the driving test and accepted the bribe through the 2^nd accused on 30.01.2026 and on this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of the above said offences, by the accused. Accordingly, the 1st accused was arrested on 30.01.2026 and he has been in custody since then.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/1^st accused argued that the petitioner is innocent and according to him, now the investigation has progressed much. Therefore, further custody of the petitioner for the purpose of investigation is not necessary. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner pressed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court, while granting bail.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor placed report of the Investigating Officer and strongly opposed grant of regular bail to the petitioner. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted further that, the petitioner has criminal antecedents and he is facing a criminal prosecution for amazement of wealth before the Special Court, Kollam as C.C. No.60/2025 and this is the

2^nd crime registered against the petitioner.

6. In this case, the petitioner/1^st accused was arrested on 30.01.2026. On reading the available materials, there is no reason to disbelieve the prosecution allegations and in fact, the prosecution allegations are well made out, prima facie. However, the investigation found to be progressed much and in such view of the matter, further custody of the petitioner for the purpose of investigation is not necessary.

7. Taking into consideration the above aspects, I am of the view that, the petitioner can be enlarged on bail.

Therefore, this petition stands allowed. The petitioner is enlarged on bail on conditions:

i. The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional court concerned.

ii. The petitioner shall not intimidate the witnesses or tamper with evidence. He shall co-operate with the investigation and shall be available for trial.

iii. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed, apart from appearing before the Investigating Officer on alternate Saturdays in between 9 am and 10 am, for a period of four month