LUCKNOW, Dec. 23 -- The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court rejected the anticipatory bail applications of Rajeev Kumar Bansal, an assistant regional transport officer (ARTO) posted in Lucknow and Manoj Kumar Bharadwaj, a passenger transport officer (PTO), accused of involvement in a syndicate facilitating the illegal passage of overloaded trucks. The court also rejected the anticipatory bail application of an enforcement supervisor in the transport department accused of being part of the syndicate. It observed that corruption by public servants destroys the societal will to progress and held that no exceptional circumstances existed to grant pre-arrest bail given the gravity of the allegations. Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar passed the separate orders on December 19 and 18, respectively, rejecting anticipatory bail applications of the accused moved separately. The case stems from an FIR registered by the STF at Madiaon police station, Lucknow, alleging the operation of a racket involving transport department officials. The prosecution alleged that overloaded trucks transporting sand and gravel were allowed passage without valid permits in connivance with RTO, PTO officials and their subordinate staff. On November 11, 2025, the STF apprehended one Abhinav Pandey, who allegedly confessed to coordinating the illegal passage of vehicles by collecting bribes from truck owners and drivers. Acting on his disclosure, an overloaded truck was intercepted. The driver of the truck said payments had already been made to transport officials through Pandey. The investigation revealed that the syndicate operated throughout the state, charging Rs 5,000 to Rs 6,000 illegally per truck to evade statutory penalties. The applicant, Anuj Kumar Nishad, posted as an enforcement supervisor under ARTO Rajiv Bansal, sought anticipatory bail in the case. Bansal and PTO Bharadwaj also sought anticipatory bail in the case. Opposing the bail plea, state counsel JS Tomar, submitted that a "well-organised network" of officers, including the applicants, was involved in the crime. He relied on extracts from the case diary, pointing out that a truck initially shown to have a gross weight of 44,370 kg was found to weigh 66,340 kg upon re-weighing, indicating a deliberate conspiracy to underreport weight. The court observed that prima facie evidence established active communication between the applicant and the co-accused, indicating the operation of a well-organised network causing substantial revenue loss to the state. With this observation, the court rejected the anticipatory bail applications....