JUDGMENT :

Mr. Alok Mahra, J.

Applicant – Basant Kumar Joshi, who is in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R./Case Crime No. 04 of 2025, under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018), registered at Police Station Vigilance Establishment Centre Haldwani, District Nainital has sought his release on bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. It is alleged that, on the basis of a trap memo, the aforesaid F.I.R. was registered against the applicant, who is serving as an Accountant in the Treasury Office, Nainital. It is further alleged that the applicant, along with four other employees posted as Personal Assistants in the Department, had submitted an application to the District Judge, Nainital, seeking the benefit of the Assured Career Progression (ACP) scheme. Acting upon the said application, the District Judge constituted a three- member committee comprising two senior judicial officers and the Chief Treasury Officer, Nainital. Upon examination and due signing of all service-related documents by the committee members, the files were sent to the Chief Treasury Officer for approval and signature as per the Rules. It is also alleged that subsequently, the complainant came to know that the Chief Treasury Officer was reluctant to sign the ACP files. On 29.04.2025, at around 09:01 and 09:02 p.m., two phone calls were received from an unknown number on the mobile phone of the complainant, which he could not answer. At around 09:08 p.m., the complainant returned the call and was informed by the caller, who identified himself as “Joshi,” to meet him at 11:00 a.m. the next day at the CTO office regarding the ACP matter.

4. On 30.04.2025, at around 11:30 a.m., the complainant met the said Joshi, who is posted as Accountant in the Treasury Office, Nainital. It is alleged that Joshi informed the complainant that the Chief Treasury Officer was ready to sign the ACP files and that, as the total ACP amount came to around ₹5 to ₹6 lakhs, the CTO had demanded ₹50,000/- per person for signing the same. On 01.05.2025, the complainant again met Joshi at about 11:00–11:30 a.m., and when he expressed inability to pay such a huge amount, Joshi allegedly reduced the demand to ₹40,000/- per person. On the complainant further refusing, Joshi allegedly conveyed that all six applicants together should pay ₹1.50 lakhs, stating that he was merely relaying the message of the CTO and had no personal concern, and that otherwise their work would not be processed. Subsequently, on 09.05.2025, a pre-trap memo was prepared and proceedings were initiated on the same day, forming the basis of the F.I.R. registered against the applicant. Based on the alleged trap, a recovery memo was prepared and other formalities were purportedly completed at the spot.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is contended that the F.I.R. rests on false and fabricated allegations. As per the prosecution, the alleged demand of illegal gratification was made to the complainant, who is serving as a Stenographer in the Judgeship at Dehradun. However, in his complaint dated 02.05.2025 addressed to the Superintendent of Police (Vigilance), Haldwani, the complainant alleged that the applicant had called him to the office on 09.05.2025 and demanded ₹1,20,000/-, a version inconsistent with the earlier allegations.

6. It is further submitted that the alleged demand was made at the behest of the co-accused Dinesh Kumar Rana, the competent authority to sign the ACP files, while the alleged payment was attributed to the present applicant. The applicant, being an Accountant, had no authority or role in either approving or signing the ACP files. The prosecution has failed to produce any independent witness from the Treasury Office to corroborate the alleged recovery of illegal gratification. It is also argued that the alleged recovery was shown from an Almi