No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 1778 of 2025 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J. Mr. H.C. Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. The applicant – Virendra Singh Kaintura, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/ Case Crime No. 04 of 2025, under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018), registered at P.S.- Vigilance Establishment, District Dehradun, has sought his release on bail. 4. In this case, a complaint was lodged by one Sri Rajiv Sharma to S.P. Vigilance, against the accused, who was serving on the post of Nazir in Tehsil Dhanaulti under Section 7 of P.C. Act. Thereafter, on 13.05.2025, an FIR was lodged against the applicant. 5. As per the case of the prosecution case, the information was received from one Sri Rajiv Sharma that the accused is asking for Rs. 15,000/ - as bribe for a mutation case. Thereafter, a preliminary investigation was done and prima face case was found to be genuine. Thereafter, a trap team was constituted on 08.05.2025, but, on that date, when the trap team reached at the spot, the applicant was on leave and it was learnt that the applicant would return to office on 13.05.2025. Thereafter, the trap team did the trap on 13.05.2025, whereby, the accused was caught red-handed accepting Rs. 15,000/ - as bribe. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the allegations levelled against the applicant are totally false and fabricated and not supported by any documentary evidence inasmuch as the applicant is serving on the post of Nazir and he has no jurisdiction to pass any order in mutation case and that power vests with the Tehsildar; work of the Nazir is to maintain the record and file of the Tehsildar and to prepare a note-sheet with regard to the mutation, which he has prepared and Nazir is not responsible for the mutation itself; that note-sheet is part of the record; the applicant was arrested on 13.05.2025; there are no independent witness and chargesheet in the case was filed on 11.07.2025 and there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. 8. 8. Per contra, learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the bail application and would submit that the offence alleged is of a grave and heinous nature. 9. Having considered the submissions, under the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 10. Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. ( Alok Mah r a J.) 28.11.2025 Ujjwal