SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 1750

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
V. SRISHANANDA, J.
Shri Narasimhaiah Revenue Inspector, BBMP, Since Dead Represented By His Legal Representatives- Smt. Padmamma (W/o. Late Narasimhaiah) and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State By Lokayuktha Police, Represented By Standing Counsel And Spl. Public Prosecutor In The Honble High Court For Lokayuktha Cases, Bangalore – Respondent 
Crl. A. No.566 of 2012
Decided On : 07-02-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Sri B.C. Seetharama Rao, Advocate
For the Respondent: Sri B.S. Prasad, SPL.PP.

The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of bribe, which was established through witness testimonies and forensic evidence.

Headnote:(A) Prevention of Corruption Act - Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) - Conviction of accused for demanding and accepting bribe - Accused demanded Rs.3,000/- for change of khatha, reduced to Rs.1,000/- - Complainant approached Lokayuktha Police, leading to a trap - Tainted currency was seized, and chemical tests confirmed bribe acceptance - Trial Court convicted accused based on evidence of shadow witness and complainant - Appellant's death during appeal led to dependants pursuing the case. (Paras 2, 3, 4, 15, 62)

(B) Burden of Proof - The prosecution must establish demand and acceptance of bribe, which was proven through witness testimonies and forensic evidence. (Paras 57, 59)

(C) Appeal Dismissed - The appeal was found meritless, and the conviction was upheld. (Paras 64)

JUDGMENT :

V. SRISHANANDA, J.

Heard the arguments of Sri B.C. Seetharama Rao, learned counsel for the dependants of appellant and Sri B.S. Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. Accused in Special C.C.No.16/2006 who suffered an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 7, 13 (1) (d) r/w Section 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act by judgment dated 30.04.2012, passed by the Special Judge, Bengaluru Urban District, Bengaluru (CCH-24) is the appellant. Appellant died during the pendency of appeal and his dependants are brought on record to pursue the appeal further.

3. Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the appeal are as under:

Complainant having purchased a house measuring 18.3 feet X 25 feet approached the accused who was a bill collector, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (hereinafter referred to as ‘BBMP’), Malleswaram for change of khatha in his name. At that juncture, accused said to have demanded sum of Rs.3,000/- as bribe. Complainant expressed his inability to pay the said bribe amount and on negotiation, bribe amount was reduced to Rs.1,000/-.

4. Complainant being not willing to pay the bribe amount of Rs.1,000/-, approached the Lokayuktha Police and gave a complaint. Lokayuktha police after registering the case in Cr.No.10/2005 for the offence punishable under Section 7, 13 (1) (d) r/w Section 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act (‘P.C. Act’ for short), formed a raid team comprising of Inspector of Lokayuktha, Sub staff, two pancha witnesses who were secured by the head of the raid party.

5. Contents of the complaint were read over to the pancha witnesses and thereafter they were appraised of the chemical reaction of phenolphthalein powder with Sodium Carbonate solution. Intended bribe amount in a sum of Rs.1,000/- comprising of Rs.100/- denomination ten currency notes were received from the hands of the complainant and its serial numbers were noted, phenolphthalein powder was smeared on those notes and entrustment mahazar was recorded. Complainant was directed to hand over the bribe amount only on demand by the accused on the day of trap and shadow witness was directed to accompany the complainant and directed to observe the demand of the bribe amount and handing over of the bribe amount. Complainant was directed to furnish a pre designated signal to the Lokayuktha police after the tainted currency is handed over to the accused on demand.

6. Thereafter, the raid party left to the office of the appellant. When they reached the office, appellant was spotted by the complainant in the varanda and complainant showed the accused to shadow witness. Complainant and shadow witness then greeted the accused. Thereafter accused took him to his office room. Appellant demanded the bribe money. Complainant at that juncture, handed over the tainted currency to the accused and shadow witness was standing by the side of the complainant. Accused took the currency notes in his both hands and transferred it to his right hand. As directed by the head of the raid party, complainant came out of the office and gave pre-designated signal by combing his hairs. Immediately all the members of the raid party came to the office of the accused and enquired him as to tainted currency. His hands were washed in separate bowls consisting of colourless solution and colourless solution found in both the bowls turned into pink colour. They were transferred onto two bottles and sealed and seized. Thereafter the tainted currency which was kept on his table was seized. Same was examined and tallied with the serial numbers in the entrusted mahazar and the same was also seized. The tainted currency consisted of ten notes of Rs.100/- denomination each.

7. Assistant Revenue Officer was present in the office was told by the head of the raid party to furnish the attendance register and the same was also verified by the head of the raid party and photocopy of the relevant page was seized and attested by Assistant Revenu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top