IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30th DAY OF MAY 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3640/2017 Between:
Sudhakar S/o Ranga Reddy Aged about 38 years PC 1086, APMC yard PS Bellary – 583102.
(By Mr. Chandrashekar R.P., Advocate) And:
...Petitioner State of Karnataka By ACB PS Race Course Road Khanija Bhavan Bangalore City-02 ... Respondent (By Mr. B.N. Jagadeesh, Spl.P.P.) **** This Crl.P. is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to grant bail in Crime No.11/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, ACB PS pending on the file of the Court of the 23rd Addl. City Civil and Sessions Court, CCH-24 Bangalore on such terms and conditions in the ends of justice.
This Crl.P. coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER The Respondent Police have registered a FIR against the petitioner (Accused No.2) and another in Crime No.11/2017, in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 7,13 (1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for short).
2. The gist of the allegation is, the complainant, a Police Constable was prosecuted by the Lokayukta Police in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Act and after a full fledged trial, was acquitted of the charges. Still, a Certificate to the effect that ‘it is not a fit case for appeal’ was required to be issued from the Lokayukta Office. The Accused No.1 works as a Judgment Writer in the Lokayukta Office, Bengaluru and the complainant approached him to pursue for the said Certificate. In turn, the Accused No.1 demanded the bribe amount of `34,000/- and had received `1,000/- as a token amount, under the threat that otherwise he will be fixed in similar case.
3. The complainant lodged a complaint with the Respondent – Police Station along with the CD of his conversation with the first accused. The said CD disclosed the involvement of the present petitioner, since the first accused had insisted the complainant to hand over the bribe money to the petitioner, a trap was laid by the Investigating Officer and this petitioner was caught red-handed while receiving the tainted currency notes from the complainant on 06-04-2016. The trap having been successful. Trap Mahazar is drawn and major portion of the investigation is complete.
4. For the adjudication of the present petition, it is suffice to note that, since major portion of the investigation is already complete and the petitioner is not required anymore for custodial interrogation and he being an employee of the State, there is no chance of his fleeing away from the process of law.
5. Under these circumstances, there is no impediment to allow the petition.
6. Accordingly the petition is allowed. Petitioner is enlarged on bail on executing a self bond for a sum of `50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only), with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial court. He shall not threaten or prevail upon the complainant/prosecution witnesses.
He shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during the further course of investigation and appear before him as and when called upon, for the purpose of interrogation.
Sd/- JUDGE BMV*