Karnataka High CourtCriminal LawCriminal Procedure and Evidence

Karnataka HC Refuses To Quash FIR Against Clerk After Co-Accused Allegedly Said ₹10,000 Was Payable To Him; Investigation Continues

ARVINDv.THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Karnataka HC Refuses To Quash FIR Against Clerk After Co-Accused Allegedly Said ₹10,000 Was Payable To Him; Investigation Continues. ARVIND vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the FIR against the petitioner for an offence under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act should be quashed under Section 528 of the BNSS while the investigation remains ongoing.

The court held

The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner’s grounds did not justify quashing the FIR while the investigation remained ongoing.

It also directed

It left the petitioner at liberty to challenge the final report, if aggrieved, and disposed of any pending interim application as not surviving for consideration.

01Facts

The complainant’s allegations led the Lokayukta Police to register Crime No. 3/2026 against accused No. 1 and the petitioner, accused No. 2, for an offence under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

p. 4

The trap was conducted in respect of accused No. 1; the allegation against the petitioner was that accused No. 1 told the complainant that Rs. 10,000 had to be paid to him

p. 4

The petitioner relied on a Deputy Commissioner’s memorandum identifying another person as the applicant for conversion of the land for a petrol pump, and on a document concerning the handing over of the relevant work to him, to contend that he was unconnected with the alleged work.

pp. 4–5

He sought to quash the FIR under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The investigation was ongoing, and the complainant did not appear despite service.

pp. 2–3

02Issues

i.1. Whether the FIR against the petitioner for an offence under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act should be quashed under Section 528 of the BNSS while the investigation remains ongoing.

pp. 2–3, 5–6

ii.2. Whether the petitioner’s documentary contentions—that he was unconnected with the land-conversion work and that the complainant’s connection to the property was unsubstantiated—could justify quashing the FIR at this stage.

pp. 4–6

03Law Applied

The petition was brought under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, invoking the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction to seek quashing of the FIR.

p. 2

The alleged offence was under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

p. 2, 4

The Court applied the principle that, where investigation is still in progress and the petitioner’s grounds raise matters requiring investigation, those grounds do not warrant quashing the FIR at that stage.

pp. 3, 5–6

No precedent was cited.

Provisions in the judgment · 2 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Section 7

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the trap concerned accused No. 1 and that the allegation against the petitioner was that accused No. 1 had said Rs. 10,000 was payable to him.

p. 4

The petitioner’s reliance on the memorandum and handover document, as well as his challenge to the asserted lease arrangement, raised factual matters for the Investigating Officer to examine.

pp. 4–6

Because the investigation was incomplete, the Court declined to determine those factual contentions in the quashing petition.

pp. 5–6

05Holding

The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner’s grounds did not justify quashing the FIR while the investigation remained ongoing.

pp. 6–7

It left the petitioner at liberty to challenge the final report, if aggrieved, and disposed of any pending interim application as not surviving for consideration.

p. 7
Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

ARVINDvsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Karnataka High Court · September 25, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment