ORAL ORDER

1. Rule is fixed forthwith. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of Rule for the respondent – State.

2. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11194022210016 of 2021, registered with Surat City ACB Police Station, for the offence punishable under Sections 7(a) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

3. The facts in nutshell are that Anjna K. Chauhan, Police Inspector, ACB Police Station, has alleged in her complaint dated 31.12.2021 that the original complainant, Jainex Sai, had submitted a complaint to Shri K. J. Chaudhari, Police Inspector, when he was arrested with respect to prohibition case, at that time, the present applicant, Police Constable, Athwalines Police Station, met him and informed him that matters relating to PASA and Tadipar were within his portfolio, and demanded a sum of Rs.20,000/- for not initiating proceedings under PASA/Tadipar against him. It is alleged that Jainex told the applicant that since he was in custody at that time, he would meet him after his release. It is alleged that thereafter, upon his release, the applicant allegedly contacted him repeatedly and met him at Sneh Milan Garden, where the demand for illegal gratification was reiterated and, after negotiation, reduced to Rs.15,000/-. It is alleged that Jainex recorded the conversation and produced the same before the ACB authorities, and lodged a complaint against the applicant on 09.07.2020. It is alleged that a trap was arranged, however, when Jainex attempted to contact the applicant, the applicant neither answered the calls nor reverted, resulting in failure of the trap. It is alleged that on 10.07.2020 and 14.07.2020 also the trap failed and thereafter, on 15.07.2020, Jainex requested that no further trap be arranged, as there was no demand from the applicant. It is alleged that the applicant was thereafter called upon by the police to give his statement, giving him an opportunity to defend himself. It is alleged that thereafter, on the basis of the CD produced by Jainex, which allegedly contained conversations pertaining to the demand of bribe, the FIR came to be registered against the applicant on 31.12.2021.

3.1. Pursuant to aforesaid FIR dated 31.12.2021, the applicant had preferred quashing petition bearing Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.1007 of 2022, wherein order regarding, no coercive steps would to be taken against the present applicant was passed by the coordinate bench of this Court on 28.01.2022. However, vide order dated 01.04.2026, the said petition was not pressed with a view to avail appropriate remedy, and thus, interim relief was also vacated.

3.2. Pursuant to thereby, the present applicant has preferred an application being Criminal Miscellaneous Anticipatory Application No.2521 of 2026, before the Special Court established under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Surat, for grant of anticipatory bail, which came to be rejected vide order dated 15.04.2026 by learned Special Judge, 12th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat. Hence, the present application.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Rafik Lokhandwala for the applicant would submit that in the present case, the trap proceedings had attempted on three occasions, however, have failed, and, neither demand nor acceptance has been established, and thus, none of the ingredients as stated in the FIR, more particularly, Sections 7(a) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, are attracted. He would further submit that after the trap having failed, the complainant himself has informed the police that the applicant would not demand any money from him and thus requested to stop further trap proceedings, this would indicate that there was no demand as the complainant was trying to create a false trap against the prese