Mumbai, Jan 8 (PTI) A sessions court judge from Satara in Maharashtra has moved the Bombay High Court for a pre-arrest bail after he was booked in a bribery case.

The Satara district and sessions judge Dhananjay Nikam was booked by the state Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) for allegedly demanding a bribe of Rs 5 lakh to grant bail in a cheating case.

Also Read | Tirupati Stampede: 4 Devotees Waiting for Vaikunta Dwara Sarva Darshan Tokens Die in Stampede, Andhra Pradesh CM Chandrababu Naidu Expresses Grief (Watch Videos).

A single bench of Justice N R Borkar on Wednesday said it would hear the plea in his chamber on January 15 as it involves a judicial officer.

Nikam, who filed his plea through advocate Viresh Purwant, said he was innocent and implicated in the case.

Also Read | Madhya Pradesh Fire: 2 Sisters Charred to Death, Baby Injured After Blaze Erupts in Hut in Damoh District.

The petition said the FIR didn't show any direct demand or acceptance of money by Nikam. It further argued that the judge was neither aware of meetings between the complainant and other accused nor that the complainant was related to the accused seeking bail.

It further said that Nikam was on leave or deputation on key dates, raising doubts about the allegations.

As per the complaint lodged by a woman, her father who is a civilian defence employee is in judicial custody for allegedly cheating someone under the pretext of offering a government job.

After a lower court denied him bail, the woman filed a fresh bail application in the Satara sessions court, which was supposed to be heard by Nikam.

The ACB alleged that two private individuals, Kishor Sambhaji Kharat from Mumbai and Anand Mohan Kharat from Satara, demanded Rs 5 lakh from the woman at the behest of Nikam for a favourable order.

The ACB claimed that the bribe demand was verified during their investigation between December 3 and 9, 2024, confirming that Nikam colluded with the Kharats to seek the bribe.

The ACB booked Nikam, Kishor Kharat, and Anand Kharat, and an unidentified individual under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Nikam's petition stated that he neither avoided hearing the bail application nor made any promises of favourable orders. It also noted that no such bail orders were passed during the said period.

(This is an unedited and auto-generated story from Syndicated News feed, LatestLY Staff may not have modified or edited the content body)