IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4580/2018 BETWEEN:
K.R. RANGANATH S/O LATE RANGASWAMY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS FOOD-SHIRASTHEDAR TALUK OFFICE DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRCIT R/AT DEPEDAR BUILDING SHANTHINAGAR (A.S.K. PALYA) TUMKURU – 572 101 MOB. NO.94496 66809.
(BY SRI. H.B. RUDRESH., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, KOLAR – 560 022.
2. SMT. GIRIJA ROOPA REVATHI W/O K. SURESH BABU AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS PROPRIETRIX OF M/S. SRI. REVATHI BHARATH GAS DISTRIBUTOR CORONATION ROAD BANGARPET – 560 024 KOLAR DISTRICT.
... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VENKATESH P. DALWAI., ADOVATE FOR R-1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED IN NO.01/2018 DATED:31.01.2018 AND FIR NO.1/2017 DATED:23.01.2017 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE THE SAME IS PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 7, 13(1)(d) R/W 13(2) OF P.C ACT BASED ON THE FALSE COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND TO GRANT THE PETITIONER.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard Sri.H.B.Rudresh, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.Venkatesh P. Dalwai, learned counsel appearing for first respondent. Perused the records.
2. Short facts leading to filing of this petition are:
Second respondent, is running a Cooking Gas Agency under the name and style of Sri.Revathi Bharath Gas Distributors at Bangarpet lodged a complaint with first respondent on 23.01.2017 alleging that a person introduced himself as official from Food and Civil Supplies Department accompanied by person who proclaimed to be a President of Raitha Sangha and stated that said President has lodged a complaint against second respondent alleging that they are collecting excess amount than the amount prescribed by the appropriate Government for giving new free gas connection to poor people and also collecting excess amount for supply of domestic gas cylinders and in order to prevent him from holding a dharana in front of Gas agency he demanded a sum of `30,000/- to `35,000/- to be paid and for which complainant pleaded her inability to pay the said amount and requested for reducing the amount which was sought by way of bribe. She has further alleged that a sum of `10,000/- was extracted by the Shirestedar forcefully from the complainant and as she was not agreeable to pay remaining amount. On these grounds, she lodged the complaint with the first respondent to take suitable action against Petitioner.
3. On such complaint being filed FIR in Crime No.01/2017 came to be registered against petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and having laid a trap for accused, he was caught red handed while accepting bribe of `10,000/- by first respondent and as such said amount came to be seized and petitioner was arrested and produced before jurisdictional Court and was sent to judicial custody and thereafter was enlarged on bail by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Kolar. For quashing of said proceedings, petitioner is before Court.
4. It is the contention of Sri.H.B.Rudresh, learned counsel appearing for petitioner that petitioner is innocent of the offence alleged against him and trap panchanama conducted on 23.01.2017 does not contain details of the currency including denominations of currency notes seized and for lack of clarity in this regard, continuation of proceedings against petitioners would be onerous as it would not lead to conviction even if said facts were to remain unrebutted. Hence, he prays for quashing of the said proceedings.
5. He would also submit that statement of Srinivas has not been taken, who is said to be the President of Raitha Sangha and who has been cited as C.W.4 to the charge sheet registered against petitioner.
On these grounds also he seeks for quashing of the said proceedings.
6. Per contra, Sri.Venkatesh P. Dalwai, who is on advance notice and as directed by this Court has taken notice, would support the case of prosecution and prays for dismissal of the petition.
7. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for parties and on perusal of records/case papers, it would clearly disclose that insofar as contention regarding the details of currency seized having not been indicated in the panchanama, is bereft of truth. In other words, spot panchanama drawn on 23.01.2017 in the presence of panchas i.e., between 18.30 to 22.30 hours, would not only disclose the value of currency seized but also the number of currency notes seized has been indicated. In fact, this is the same currency number which was handed over to the complainant by Lokayuktha Police for being handed over to the accused/petitioner as per the entrustment mahazar, which is a pre-trap mahazar and as such said contention is without merit.
8. That apart, omissions and contradictions if any in prosecution case would not be examined by this Court while considering the prayer for quashing of the proceedings in exercise of power vested under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. While undertaking such an exercise, micro analysis of the charge sheet material would not be undertaken and even if charge sheet material discloses the offence alleged it would suffice to allow the trial to proceed, instead of stifling said proceedings. This Court finds no other good ground to entertain this petition. Hence, it stands rejected.
In view of petition having been rejected, I.A.No.1/2018 for stay does not survive for consideration and it is rejected.
Sri.Venkatesh P.Dalwai, learned panel counsel for first respondent is permitted to file memo of appearance within four (4) weeks from today.
SD/- JUDGE DR