Ravindra Maithani, J
1. Delay in filing Supplementary Affidavit is condoned. Supplementary affidavit is taken on record. Delay Condonation Application IA No.3 of 2024
stands disposed of, accordingly.
2. Applicant Lalit Mohan Arya is in judicial custody in FIR No.10 of 2023, under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station
Vigilance Sector Haldwani, District Nainital. He has sought his release on bail.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. This is the second bail application. The first bail application, being BA1 No.118 of 2024, was dismissed as withdrawn on 18.01.2024.
5. The applicant was working in a Transport Office at Ramnagar. The complainant Abdul Muttaliv was working in an establishment in the name and
style of Guru Kripa Traders, Peerumadara, Ramnagar. They were into sale of E-Rickshaw. He made a complaint that even after completing all the
formalities, the applicant is demanding Rs. 2,200/- illegal gratification for processing the registration of E-Rickshaws. A complaint was made on
21.12.2023. A trap was laid on 22.12.2023. Money was exchanged. The applicant had kept money in a file cover. The money was recovered. The
wash of the file cover as well as the hand wash turned pink.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no demand as such; it has not even been shown by the prosecution; without demand,
based on mere recovery, no offence is made out; the applicant is in custody for more than seven months.
7. Learned State Counsel would submit that the applicant demanded Rs. 2,200/- as illegal gratification, which was paid and recovered.
8. The complainant had continuously been stating that the applicant was demanding money for illegal gratification for discharge of his official duties,
i.e. for registration of E-Rickshaws. A transcript of conversation has also been filed. Pre trap and post trap memo had been prepared. Post trap
memo, in quite detail, records that the applicant took the money in a file cover and the hand wash turned pink.
9. Having considered, this Court does not see any ground, which may entitle the applicant to bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be
rejected.
10. The bail application is rejected.
