IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4471/2017 BETWEEN:
DR. G.N.GANESHKUMAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT DOOR NO.1924 14TH MAIN, 2ND STAGE VIJAYANAGAR MYSURU-570 030.
(BY SRI. JAGADEESH C.M, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE BY LOKAYUKTA POLICE CHAMRAJANAGAR REP. BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, OFFICE AT M.S.BUILDING BENGALURU-560 009.
2. GURURAJACHAR S/O LATE PUTTABUDDHACHAR AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT TELANURU VILLAGE CHAMRAJANAGAR TALUK & DISTRICT.
... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.S.ARABATTI, SPL. P.P FOR FIRST RESPONDENT) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W SECTION 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.09.2016 PASSED BY THE PRL. DIST. AND S.J. CHAMARAJANAGAR IN SPL. CASE NO.9/2016 AND DISCHARGE THE PETITIONER FROM THE ABOVE CASE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 7, 13(1)(d) R/W SECTION 13(2) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT IN ANNEXURE-A.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Case of the prosecution is that petitioner being Senior Specialist and Medical Officer at Yelandur Government Hospital had demanded bribe amount of `12,000/- in order to conduct surgery for removal of uterus of Smt. Manjula - wife of complainant. As such trap was laid and conversation preceding the said date was recorded would also disclose that accused had demanded bribe amount. Punch witnesses have stated that bribe amount was demanded by petitioner making signs with hands and subsequently trap was laid and petitioner was apprehended.
2. However, it is the contention of petitioner that amount was forcibly put into his hand by the complainant and as such application under Section 227 Cr.P.C came to be filed by accused before trial Court for discharge. Learned trial Judge after considering entire charge sheet material on record has arrived at a conclusion that pre trap conversion has taken place between accused and complainant which is transcribed in the trap mahazar, clearly revealed that accused had demanded `12,000/- for conducting surgery on complainant’s wife and said conversation which had been recorded finds a place in the mahazar. Hence, I do not find any good ground to entertain this petition. Accordingly, petition stands rejected.
In view of petition having been rejected, I.A.No.1/17 for stay does not survive of consideration. Hence, it is rejected.
SD/- JUDGE RU