Full Judgment Text
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ST
DATED THIS THE 21 DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6528 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
SIDDAPPA BANAKAR,
S/O SADASHIVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT,
MADADAKERE CIRCLE,
IN CHARGE: LAKKIHALLI CIRCLE,
HOSADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
R/AT NEAR JYOTHI TALKIES,
VIDYANAGARA, HOSADURGA TOWN,
CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
R/AT SHIRAGAMBI VILLAGE,
RATTIHALLI POST AND TALUK,
HAVERI DISTRICT – 581 110.
…PETITIONER
Digitally
signed by
NAGAVENI
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
(BY SRI. PRITHVEESH M. K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA POLICE STATION,
CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT COMPLEX,
BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. VIJAYA KUMAR V.,
S/O LATE ERAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT DODDAGATTA VILLAGE,
HIRIYURU TALUK,
CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.B.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 (FILED U/S 528 BNSS)
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND PROCEEDINGS IN
SPL.C.(PC)NO.05/2023 i.e., 1/2022 PENDING BEFORE THE
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA
FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 7(a) OF P.C. ACT REGISTERED BY
LOKAYUKTA P.S., CHITRADURGA AGAINST THE PETITIONER
HEREIN i.e., ACCUSED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the
proceedings in Spl.C.(PC) No.5/2023 arising out of Crime
No.1/2022 registered for the offence punishable under Section
7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Act' for short).
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
2. Heard Sri.Prithveesh M.K., learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner, Sri.B.B.Patil, learned counsel
appearing for respondent No.1.
3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:
3.1. The petitioner at the relevant point in time was
working as Village Accountant in Madadakere circle,
Chitradurga. The complainant is the one who was wanting the
name in the khata of the revenue records to be changed
pursuant to certain transactions. It is said that he approaches
the petitioner for the purpose of change of entries in the
revenue records or the change of the name in the khata.
Without the communication from the hands of the Village
Accountant, it could not have been done. The petitioner is said
to have demanded bribe of Rs.20,000/-, out of which,
Rs.10,000/- was agreed to be paid at the time when the work
would be done and the remaining later. The complainant pays
Rs.5,000/- and what remains is Rs.5,000/- to be paid. The
complainant then approaches the Lokayukta who would prepare
a pre-trap proceedings and lay a trap upon the petitioner. The
petitioner is caught red handed while accepting the tainted
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
currency of Rs.5,000/-. The phenolphthalein test that the
prosecution undertook on the same day was also successful
inasmuch as the hands had turned pink. The crime had been
registered in Crime No.1/2022 and investigation leads to filing
of the charge sheet. The cognizance is taken by the concerned
Court on the charge sheet so filed and taking of cognizance has
driven the present petitioner to this Court in the subject
petition.
4. Learned counsel Sri.Prithveesh M.K., appearing for
the petitioner would put up valiant effort in seeking to contend
that there is neither demand nor acceptance in the case at
hand nor there was any work pending at the hands of the
petitioner for him to demand bribe or accept bribe. There is no
demand at all in the case at hand and the recordings are not
sent to FSL. FSL report is yet to be received and therefore
would submit that the charge sheet is short laid against the
petitioner and the order of cognizance also does not indicate
that cognizance is taken for the offence under Section 7(a) of
the Act. On these submissions, learned counsel seeks
quashment of the entire proceedings.
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
Per contra
5. , learned counsel for the respondent
Sri. B.B.Patil would vehemently refute the submission in
contending that the petitioner is caught red-handed, the trap
was successful. It becomes a matter of trial in such
circumstances whether there was a demand or otherwise as
there is clear acceptance in the case at hand. The presumption
under Section 20 of the Act would kick in, once the acceptance
is found or the petitioner is caught red-handed on receiving the
tainted currency/bribe amount. The learned counsel would
submit that the charge sheet is clear and the order of
cognizance need not be reasoned once the concerned Court is
taking cognizance on the charge sheet. He would seek
dismissal of the petition.
6. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The
issue revolves around corruption. The petitioner is a Village
Accountant, is alleged to have demanded bribe of Rs.5,000/-
for performance of a particular action from the hands of the
complainant. The conversation between the two is recorded.
The recording leads to a pre-trap proceedings being laid against
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
the petitioner. A trap is laid against the petitioner later. In the
trap, the petitioner is caught receiving a bribe amount of
Rs.5,000/- and a tainted currency test that is necessary to be
undertaken i.e., phenolphthalein test is also positive. Under
these circumstances, the police conduct investigation and file a
charge sheet. The summary of the charge sheet as obtaining in
Column No.17 reads as follows:
¹
“17. :-
ೇ ೇ ನ ೋಾ ೋಪ ೆಯ ೋಾ ೋಪ ೆಯ ವರ ವರ
ೇ ೇ ೋಾ ೋಪ ೆಯ ೋಾ ೋಪ ೆಯ ವರ ವರ
; 7( a ) -1988,
ಕಲಂ ಕಲಂ ಭಾಾರ ಭ ಾಾರ ಪಬಂಧಕ ಪ ಬಂಧಕ ಾೆ ಾೆ
ಕಲಂ ಕಲಂ ಭಾಾರ ಭಾಾರ ಪಬಂಧಕ ಪಬಂಧಕ ಾೆ ಾೆ
-01 .
ಈ ಪ ಕರಣದ ಾ ! "ಾ# ರವರ ಸಂಬಂ% & ೕಮ ರಂಗಮ) ರವರು
,
+,ಯೂರು -ಾಲೂ./ ಾಟನಹ2 3ಾ ಮದ ಮ4ಾ5ಂಗಪ6 ರವರ 4ೆಸ,3ೆ ಇರುವ
, . . .12/1
4ೊಸದುಗ -ಾಲೂ./ 8ಾಡದ ೆ ೆ 4ೋಬ:ಯ , ಸ ನಂ ರ ಜ<ೕನನು= ಕ ಯೆ>
,
ಖ,ೕ! 8ಾ@ Aಾ-ೆ 8ಾ@ ೊಡುವಂ-ೆ ಾಖBಾಗಳನು= ಆEಾ!ತ ಾದ GದH ¥Àà ಬಣ ಾI
. -01
ರವ,3ೆ Jೕ@ ಬಂ!ರು-ಾK ೆ ಸLಲ6 !ನಗಳ ನಂತರ ಆEಾ!ತ ಅ% ಾ,ಯವರು "ಾ#
ರವರ ಸಂಬಂ ¢ü ರಂಗಮ)ರವರನು= ಕು,ತು ಮ4ಾ5ಂಗಪ6ನ ಮಗNಾದ "ಾಕಮ) ರವರು Aಾ-ೆ
.
8ಾಡದಂ-ೆ ತಕ ಾರು ಅO ಯ £ÀÄß ೊ2ರು-ಾK ೆ 4ಾ3ಾP QಾಡಕRೇ, ಹ Kರ ಬJ= ಎಂದು
-01 -01
:Gದ ಾರವನು= ರಂಗಮ) ರವರು "ಾ# ರವ,3ೆ :Gಾಗ "ಾ# ಮತುK ರಂಗಮ)
:16.12.2021
ರವರು !Qಾಂಕ ರಂದು ಆEಾ!ತರು ಕತ ವT Jವ +ಸು Kರುವ 8ಾಡದ ೆ ೆ
,
ಕRೇ,3ೆ 4ೋP ಆEಾ!ತರನು= Uೇ2 ಾಾಗ ರಂಗಮ) ರವರ 4ೆಸ,3ೆ ಪಹV ಬರುವಂ-ೆ
10 , -01
8ಾ@ ೊಡಲು "ಾ ರ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ೆ> Xೇ@ ೆ ಇ2 ದುH "ಾ# ರವರು ಅ ೊಂದು ಹಣ
.
ೊಡಲು ಆಗಲ. ಎಂ ಾಗ ಆEಾ!ತರು 8 "ಾ ರ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ೆ> Xೇ@ ೆ ಇ2 ರು-ಾK ೆ ನಂತರ
:18.01.2022 -01
!Qಾಂಕ ರಂದು "ಾ# ರವರು ಆEಾ!ತರ ಕRೇ,3ೆ 4ೋP ರಂಗಮ)ರವರ
10
ಜ<ೕJನ Aಾ-ೆ ಬ3ೆ[ ಾ,Gಾಗಲೂ ಸಹ ಆEಾ!ತರು "ಾ ರ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ೆ> Xೇ@ ೆ
. -01 :01.02.2022
ಇ2 ರು-ಾK ೆ "ಾ# ರವ,3ೆ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣವನು= Jೕಡಲು ಇಷ ಲ.ದ ಾರಣ !
.
ರಂದು ದೂರ Jೕ@ರು-ಾK ೆ
-1
ಸದ, ಪ ಕರಣದ ಆ ೋ]ತ ಅ% ಾ, ಾದ GದHಪ6 ಬಣ ಾI ರವರು "ಾ# ರವರ ಸಂಬಂ%
ರಂಗಮ)ರವರು ಖ,ೕ! 8ಾ@ದ ಜ<ೕJನ Aಾ-ೆ ಬದBಾವ ೆ 8ಾ@ ೊಡಲು ಆEಾ!ತರು
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
-1 ,
ತಮ) ಸ ಾ , ಕತ ವT Jವ +ಸಲು "ಾ# ರವ,3ೆ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ೆ> Xೇ@ ೆ ಇಟು
:01.02.2022 -1
!Qಾಂಕ ರಂದು "ಾ# ರವ,ಂದ ಲ^>ಹ:_ 3ಾ ಮ Bೆ ಾ>%ಾ,ಗಳ ಕRೇ,ಯ5.
5,000/- .
ರೂ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣವನು= ಪ`ೆದು ೊಂಡು ೆa 4ಾTಂa ಆP G^> b!Hರು-ಾK ೆ
,
ಆ ೋ]ತನು ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ೆ> Xೇ@ ೆ ಇಟು ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ GLೕಕ,Gರುವcದು ಈವ ೆPನ
-12
ತJAೆ ಂದ ಆ ೋ]ತನ dೕBೆ ಆ ೋಪ ಧೃಢಪಟ dೕ ೆ3ೆ ಅಂಕಣ ರ5. ಕಂಡ
ಆ ೋ]ತ ಅ% ಾ,ಯ ರುದg dೕಲ>ಂಡ ಕಲಂ ,ೕ-ಾT ೋಾ ೋಪ ಾ ಪ2 ಯನು=
.”
ಸ5.G ೆ
7. On the charge sheet, the concerned Court takes
cognizance of the offence, which reads as follows:
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ST
DATED THIS THE 21 DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6528 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
SIDDAPPA BANAKAR,
S/O SADASHIVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT,
MADADAKERE CIRCLE,
IN CHARGE: LAKKIHALLI CIRCLE,
HOSADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
R/AT NEAR JYOTHI TALKIES,
VIDYANAGARA, HOSADURGA TOWN,
CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
R/AT SHIRAGAMBI VILLAGE,
RATTIHALLI POST AND TALUK,
HAVERI DISTRICT – 581 110.
…PETITIONER
Digitally
signed by
NAGAVENI
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
(BY SRI. PRITHVEESH M. K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA POLICE STATION,
CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT COMPLEX,
BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. VIJAYA KUMAR V.,
S/O LATE ERAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT DODDAGATTA VILLAGE,
HIRIYURU TALUK,
CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.B.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 (FILED U/S 528 BNSS)
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND PROCEEDINGS IN
SPL.C.(PC)NO.05/2023 i.e., 1/2022 PENDING BEFORE THE
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA
FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 7(a) OF P.C. ACT REGISTERED BY
LOKAYUKTA P.S., CHITRADURGA AGAINST THE PETITIONER
HEREIN i.e., ACCUSED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the
proceedings in Spl.C.(PC) No.5/2023 arising out of Crime
No.1/2022 registered for the offence punishable under Section
7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Act' for short).
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
2. Heard Sri.Prithveesh M.K., learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner, Sri.B.B.Patil, learned counsel
appearing for respondent No.1.
3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:
3.1. The petitioner at the relevant point in time was
working as Village Accountant in Madadakere circle,
Chitradurga. The complainant is the one who was wanting the
name in the khata of the revenue records to be changed
pursuant to certain transactions. It is said that he approaches
the petitioner for the purpose of change of entries in the
revenue records or the change of the name in the khata.
Without the communication from the hands of the Village
Accountant, it could not have been done. The petitioner is said
to have demanded bribe of Rs.20,000/-, out of which,
Rs.10,000/- was agreed to be paid at the time when the work
would be done and the remaining later. The complainant pays
Rs.5,000/- and what remains is Rs.5,000/- to be paid. The
complainant then approaches the Lokayukta who would prepare
a pre-trap proceedings and lay a trap upon the petitioner. The
petitioner is caught red handed while accepting the tainted
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
currency of Rs.5,000/-. The phenolphthalein test that the
prosecution undertook on the same day was also successful
inasmuch as the hands had turned pink. The crime had been
registered in Crime No.1/2022 and investigation leads to filing
of the charge sheet. The cognizance is taken by the concerned
Court on the charge sheet so filed and taking of cognizance has
driven the present petitioner to this Court in the subject
petition.
4. Learned counsel Sri.Prithveesh M.K., appearing for
the petitioner would put up valiant effort in seeking to contend
that there is neither demand nor acceptance in the case at
hand nor there was any work pending at the hands of the
petitioner for him to demand bribe or accept bribe. There is no
demand at all in the case at hand and the recordings are not
sent to FSL. FSL report is yet to be received and therefore
would submit that the charge sheet is short laid against the
petitioner and the order of cognizance also does not indicate
that cognizance is taken for the offence under Section 7(a) of
the Act. On these submissions, learned counsel seeks
quashment of the entire proceedings.
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
Per contra
5. , learned counsel for the respondent
Sri. B.B.Patil would vehemently refute the submission in
contending that the petitioner is caught red-handed, the trap
was successful. It becomes a matter of trial in such
circumstances whether there was a demand or otherwise as
there is clear acceptance in the case at hand. The presumption
under Section 20 of the Act would kick in, once the acceptance
is found or the petitioner is caught red-handed on receiving the
tainted currency/bribe amount. The learned counsel would
submit that the charge sheet is clear and the order of
cognizance need not be reasoned once the concerned Court is
taking cognizance on the charge sheet. He would seek
dismissal of the petition.
6. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The
issue revolves around corruption. The petitioner is a Village
Accountant, is alleged to have demanded bribe of Rs.5,000/-
for performance of a particular action from the hands of the
complainant. The conversation between the two is recorded.
The recording leads to a pre-trap proceedings being laid against
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
the petitioner. A trap is laid against the petitioner later. In the
trap, the petitioner is caught receiving a bribe amount of
Rs.5,000/- and a tainted currency test that is necessary to be
undertaken i.e., phenolphthalein test is also positive. Under
these circumstances, the police conduct investigation and file a
charge sheet. The summary of the charge sheet as obtaining in
Column No.17 reads as follows:
¹
“17. :-
ೇ ೇ ನ ೋಾ ೋಪ ೆಯ ೋಾ ೋಪ ೆಯ ವರ ವರ
ೇ ೇ ೋಾ ೋಪ ೆಯ ೋಾ ೋಪ ೆಯ ವರ ವರ
; 7( a ) -1988,
ಕಲಂ ಕಲಂ ಭಾಾರ ಭ ಾಾರ ಪಬಂಧಕ ಪ ಬಂಧಕ ಾೆ ಾೆ
ಕಲಂ ಕಲಂ ಭಾಾರ ಭಾಾರ ಪಬಂಧಕ ಪಬಂಧಕ ಾೆ ಾೆ
-01 .
ಈ ಪ ಕರಣದ ಾ ! "ಾ# ರವರ ಸಂಬಂ% & ೕಮ ರಂಗಮ) ರವರು
,
+,ಯೂರು -ಾಲೂ./ ಾಟನಹ2 3ಾ ಮದ ಮ4ಾ5ಂಗಪ6 ರವರ 4ೆಸ,3ೆ ಇರುವ
, . . .12/1
4ೊಸದುಗ -ಾಲೂ./ 8ಾಡದ ೆ ೆ 4ೋಬ:ಯ , ಸ ನಂ ರ ಜ<ೕನನು= ಕ ಯೆ>
,
ಖ,ೕ! 8ಾ@ Aಾ-ೆ 8ಾ@ ೊಡುವಂ-ೆ ಾಖBಾಗಳನು= ಆEಾ!ತ ಾದ GದH ¥Àà ಬಣ ಾI
. -01
ರವ,3ೆ Jೕ@ ಬಂ!ರು-ಾK ೆ ಸLಲ6 !ನಗಳ ನಂತರ ಆEಾ!ತ ಅ% ಾ,ಯವರು "ಾ#
ರವರ ಸಂಬಂ ¢ü ರಂಗಮ)ರವರನು= ಕು,ತು ಮ4ಾ5ಂಗಪ6ನ ಮಗNಾದ "ಾಕಮ) ರವರು Aಾ-ೆ
.
8ಾಡದಂ-ೆ ತಕ ಾರು ಅO ಯ £ÀÄß ೊ2ರು-ಾK ೆ 4ಾ3ಾP QಾಡಕRೇ, ಹ Kರ ಬJ= ಎಂದು
-01 -01
:Gದ ಾರವನು= ರಂಗಮ) ರವರು "ಾ# ರವ,3ೆ :Gಾಗ "ಾ# ಮತುK ರಂಗಮ)
:16.12.2021
ರವರು !Qಾಂಕ ರಂದು ಆEಾ!ತರು ಕತ ವT Jವ +ಸು Kರುವ 8ಾಡದ ೆ ೆ
,
ಕRೇ,3ೆ 4ೋP ಆEಾ!ತರನು= Uೇ2 ಾಾಗ ರಂಗಮ) ರವರ 4ೆಸ,3ೆ ಪಹV ಬರುವಂ-ೆ
10 , -01
8ಾ@ ೊಡಲು "ಾ ರ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ೆ> Xೇ@ ೆ ಇ2 ದುH "ಾ# ರವರು ಅ ೊಂದು ಹಣ
.
ೊಡಲು ಆಗಲ. ಎಂ ಾಗ ಆEಾ!ತರು 8 "ಾ ರ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ೆ> Xೇ@ ೆ ಇ2 ರು-ಾK ೆ ನಂತರ
:18.01.2022 -01
!Qಾಂಕ ರಂದು "ಾ# ರವರು ಆEಾ!ತರ ಕRೇ,3ೆ 4ೋP ರಂಗಮ)ರವರ
10
ಜ<ೕJನ Aಾ-ೆ ಬ3ೆ[ ಾ,Gಾಗಲೂ ಸಹ ಆEಾ!ತರು "ಾ ರ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ೆ> Xೇ@ ೆ
. -01 :01.02.2022
ಇ2 ರು-ಾK ೆ "ಾ# ರವ,3ೆ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣವನು= Jೕಡಲು ಇಷ ಲ.ದ ಾರಣ !
.
ರಂದು ದೂರ Jೕ@ರು-ಾK ೆ
-1
ಸದ, ಪ ಕರಣದ ಆ ೋ]ತ ಅ% ಾ, ಾದ GದHಪ6 ಬಣ ಾI ರವರು "ಾ# ರವರ ಸಂಬಂ%
ರಂಗಮ)ರವರು ಖ,ೕ! 8ಾ@ದ ಜ<ೕJನ Aಾ-ೆ ಬದBಾವ ೆ 8ಾ@ ೊಡಲು ಆEಾ!ತರು
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
-1 ,
ತಮ) ಸ ಾ , ಕತ ವT Jವ +ಸಲು "ಾ# ರವ,3ೆ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ೆ> Xೇ@ ೆ ಇಟು
:01.02.2022 -1
!Qಾಂಕ ರಂದು "ಾ# ರವ,ಂದ ಲ^>ಹ:_ 3ಾ ಮ Bೆ ಾ>%ಾ,ಗಳ ಕRೇ,ಯ5.
5,000/- .
ರೂ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣವನು= ಪ`ೆದು ೊಂಡು ೆa 4ಾTಂa ಆP G^> b!Hರು-ಾK ೆ
,
ಆ ೋ]ತನು ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ೆ> Xೇ@ ೆ ಇಟು ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ GLೕಕ,Gರುವcದು ಈವ ೆPನ
-12
ತJAೆ ಂದ ಆ ೋ]ತನ dೕBೆ ಆ ೋಪ ಧೃಢಪಟ dೕ ೆ3ೆ ಅಂಕಣ ರ5. ಕಂಡ
ಆ ೋ]ತ ಅ% ಾ,ಯ ರುದg dೕಲ>ಂಡ ಕಲಂ ,ೕ-ಾT ೋಾ ೋಪ ಾ ಪ2 ಯನು=
.”
ಸ5.G ೆ
7. On the charge sheet, the concerned Court takes
cognizance of the offence, which reads as follows:
| “21.10.2023. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Police Inspector, Karnataka Lokayukta, | ||||
| Chitradurga has submitted charge sheet in Cr.No. | ||||
| 01/2022 of ACB (Karnataka Lokayuktha) PS. Chitradurga | ||||
| against the accused Siddappa Banakar for the offence | ||||
| punishable U/sec. 7(a) of PC Act 1988. | ||||
| Charge sheet is verified and found to be correct. | ||||
| Accused is on Court Bail. | ||||
| 23 witnesses are cited in the charge sheet. | ||||
| Properties seized in this case are not produced. | ||||
| One set of prosecution papers is furnished. | ||||
| One set of Accused copy is furnished. | ||||
| FIR., Complaint, PF and other connected papers | ||||
| pertaining to Cr.No. 01/2022 of ACB (Karnataka | ||||
| Lokayuktha) PS, Chitradurga are herewith enclosed. | ||||
| For orders, | ||||
| Sd/- | ||||
| 21/10/23 | ||||
| C.A.O. | ||||
| ORDER | ||||
| Perused the charge sheet and | ||||
| its enclosures. |
- 8 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
| Congnizance of the offence<br>P/U/Sec. 7(a)of PC Act.<br>Register as Spl.C (PC).<br>Notify to PP.<br>Issue SS to the Accused.<br>Call on, | Congnizance of the offence | |
|---|---|---|
| P/U/Sec. 7(a)of PC Act. | ||
| Register as Spl.C (PC). | ||
| Notify to PP. | ||
| Issue SS to the Accused. | ||
| Call on, | ||
| Sd/- | ||
| 5/12/2023 | ||
| Prl. District and Sessions Judge, | ||
| Chitradurga.” |
The issue now is whether this Court at this juncture should
interfere in a case where a public servant is caught accepting
bribe amount. If the petitioner had not received any amount or
somebody else had received the amount, then it would have
been a different circumstance to be considered. Here the
petitioner himself has received the tainted currency/bribe
amount, I do not find anything wanting in the procedure
followed by the prosecution i.e., Lokayukta in laying the trap or
in filing the charge sheet. The charge sheet being in detail and
the issue being of corruption, it would mask the order of
cognizance though it does contain some reasons which would
not be enough reasons in the eye of law. But the petitioner
being caught red-handed, this Court would not lend its
protective hands to a person/public servant who has been
- 9 -
NC: 2026:KHC:3288
CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024
HC-KAR
caught red-handed by receiving an amount of Rs.5,000/-. It is
for the petitioner to come out clean in a full-blown trial.
8. Petition lacking in merits, stands rejected .
It is made clear that the observations made in the course
of the order would not bind or influence the trial against the
petitioner. The concerned Court shall independently apply its
mind and regulate its procedure.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
CBC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8
CT:SS