SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No.2231 of 2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. with Mr. Himashu Sain, Brief Holder for the State. 3. The present applicant-Deepak Joshi, S/o Shri Basant Ballabh Joshi is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 24.10.2025, bearing FIR No.0007 of 2025 registered at P.S. Vigilance Establishment, Sector, Haldwani, District Nainital, wherein, the present applicant has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been implicated with mala fide intent since the complainant himself was challaned earlier under the Forest Act and the present applicant being Forest Guard is one of the witnesses in the said case. He further submits that even as per the prosecution, there is no recovery from the applicant and the recovery is shown from the other co- accused. Apart from this, he submits that the procedure as laid down under the SOP has not been followed, since the shadow witness was not present with the complainant at the time, when the trap was conducted. He further submits that not only this, the applicant is not posted in the area where the alleged incident was happened i.e. Kanteshwar. He further pointed out that even at the time of trap, the voice recorder was switched off which is evident from the recovery memo. He further submits that the applicant’s entire service is unblemished and at no point of time, any disciplinary proceeding was ever been initiated against the applicant. 5. On the other side, Mr. V.S. Pal, learned AGA also fairly submits that the shadow witness was not present with the complainant at the time when the trap was conducted and the voice recorder was switched off. He also submits that there is no recovery from the present applicant and the recovery is from the other co-accused. He has also not disputed that the present applicant was, in fact, the witness in a proceeding in which the complainant was challaned under the Forest Department. He has also not disputed that the applicant has not faced any departmental proceeding about any misconduct. 6. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that there is no recovery from the present applicant and furthermore, the procedure as laid down in the SOP has not been strictly followed, and furthermore, the applicant is the witness in a proceeding in which the complainant is Challaned under the Forest Act, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant-Deepak Joshi be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 04.12.2025 Ravi