Back
2020 Supreme(Kar) 94
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
K. Somashekar, J.
Mr. Siddappa H. Kaller S/o Mr. Hosurappa – Petitioner
Versus
State of Karnataka by Lokayuktha Police Chikmagaluru – Respondent
Criminal Revision Petition No. 506 of 2018, Criminal Petition No. 6664 of 2017
Decided On : 13-03-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri Shankarappa Advocate
For the Respondent: Sri Venkatesh .S. Arabatti – Spl.P.P
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification in corruption cases.
Headnote:
Corruption - Prevention of Corruption Act - Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2)
Fact of the Case:
The accused, an RTO officer, was alleged to have accepted bribes through a subordinate employee. The accused contended that he was not present during the alleged incidents and that the charges were based on false allegations due to professional rivalries.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no evidence of demand or acceptance of illegal gratification by the accused. The court also noted discrepancies in the prosecution's case and the accused's alibi. The court allowed the petition of the accused RTO officer and discharged him from the charges. The petition of the subordinate employee was rejected, and he was ordered to face trial.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused RTO officer was involved in corrupt activities and whether the subordinate employee's allegations were credible.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that there was insufficient evidence to establish the accused RTO officer's involvement in corrupt activities. The court also emphasized the importance of proving demand and acceptance of illegal gratification in corruption cases.
Final Decision: The accused RTO officer was discharged from the charges, while the subordinate employee was ordered to face trial.
ORDER :
Crl.P.No.506/2018 is filed by the petitioner namely Siddappa H.Kalleri who is arraigned as accused No.1 in Special Case No.35/2015 challenging the order dated 26.02.2018 passed by the Prl.District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge at Chikkamagaluru on an application filed by him under Section 227 Cr.P.C seeking discharge from the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
2. Crl.P.No.6664/2017 is filed by the petitioner namely K.Chandregowda who is arraigned as accused No.2 seeking to quash the entire proceedings in Special Case No.35/2015 on the file of Prl.District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru.
3. The factual matrix of these petitions is that in the after noon of 17.7.2014, the PSI of Lokayukta Police, Chikmagaluru received a credible information to the effect that accused No.1 who was incharge of RTO Chikmagalur had been accepting bribe from mediator accused No.2 who was working in the said office as Dgroup employee. At the time of raid, respondent police found an amount of Rs.30,380/- which was in the possession of accused No.2. On enquiry he disclosed that as per the direction of accused No.1, he has been collecting the amount from the public for the signature of accused No.1 who was signing on forms in respect of transfer of ownership of vehicles, registration of new vehicles, permit for installing gas, Bus route permit, Driver’s license etc. When they raided the RTO Office, accused No.1 was not found in the office and they had information that after getting information regarding the raid by Lokayukta Police, Accused No.1 left the office. The police inspector of Lokayukta apprehended accused No.2 and also seized the bribe amount of Rs.30,380/- in denomination of Rs.1000, 500, 100, 20 and 10 as depicted in the mahazar.
4. Subsequently, a case came to be registered by the Lokayukta Police in Crime No.5/2014. Thereafter the Lokayukta Police investigated the case by recording the statement of witnesses and so also drew the mahazar in the presence of witnesses. In all CW.1 to CW.32 were cited as witnesses. Subsequently, charge sheet came to be filed by the Lokayukta Police under the aforesaid provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act against the accused persons. The Prl.District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge at Chikkamagalur took cognizance of the offence and issued process against the accused in Spl.C.C.No.35/2015.
5. Subsequently, Accused No.1 - Siddappa H.Kalleri filed Crl.Revision Petition No.1288/2016 before this Court under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. seeking to set aside the order dated 23.03.2016 of framing charge against the petitioner. This court vide order dated 6.1.2017 dismissed the petition as not maintainable.
6. Further, petitioner/accused No.1 filed Crl.P.7735/2015 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. before this Court seeking to set-aside the order dated 27.07.2015 passed by the Prl.District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Chickmagalur in Spl.C.C.No.35/2015 to quash all further proceedings. This petition came to be dismissed vide order dated 16.09.2016 with certain observations.
7. Further, the petitioner/Accused No.1 filed Crl.P.No.7392/2014 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR in Crime No.5/2014 registered by the Lokayukta Police, Chikkamagalur. This Court vide order dated 23.08.2017 dismissed the petition as having become infructuous, since respondent police had filed the charge sheet. It was also observed that if an application for discharge under Section 227 of Cr.P.C has already been filed, the trial Court to consider the same in accordance with law.
8. Therefore, petitioner/Accused No.1 has filed Crl.R.P.No.506/2018 seeking to set aside the order dated 26.02.2018 passed by the Prl. District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge at Chikkamagalur in Spl. Case No.35/2015 dismissing the application filed under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. to discharge him of the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/
