A prima facie case for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC was established based on evidence of demand and acceptance of bribes, necessitating a trial.

CAV ORDER

The petitioner/accused No.2 is knocking at the doors of this Court calling in question proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.2647 of 2022 registered for offences punishable under Sections 120B and 201 of the IPC and under Section 7 of the PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT , 1988 (‘PC Act’ for short).

2. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:

The petitioner is a constable in the Railway Protection Force and was at the relevant point in time working at Byappanahalli. On 17-02-2022 a report emerges from the Competent Authority communicated to the accused No.1 regarding damage caused to the optical fiber cable, which was cut by usage of the JCB, which effected important communication circuit and also observed that the loss caused as a penalty was assessed at Rs.1.5 lakhs. The next day, the Control Room of the RPF directed the accused No.1 to investigate the matter, on which the accused No.1 Inspector and the Assistant Sub-Inspector makes an occurrence report and conducts spot inspection, issues summons to the Managing Director of Athreya Hospital, since it was while digging the construction of the said hospital, damage was caused to the cables which was railway property. A case was then registered against an employee of the hospital for illegal trespass. The Maintenance Manager of Athreya Hospital then complains to the CBI against the RPF Officials, here comes the petitioner into the picture.

3. The complaint was regarding demand of illegal gratification by accused Nos.1 and 2 threatening that they would not only proceed against the accused in the aforesaid crime, but would also proceed against several others. The commander of the RPF then issues summons to the Managing Director of the hospital to appear before him. It is on all these circumstances, the Managing Director records the conversation that happens between him, the accused No.1 and the petitioner. It is this recording that depicts demand of bribe of Rs.1.5 lakhs along with fine of Rs.25,000/-. The recording then is handed over to the CBI by way of a complaint on 02-03-2002. The complaint then becomes a crime in R.C.04(A)/2022, lodged by the Anti-Corruption Bureau for offences punishable under Section 7 of the PC Act and Sections 120B and 201 of the IPC. The police conduct investigation and file a charge sheet for the afore-quoted offences. The allegations in the charge sheet was that the petitioner and accused No.1 demanded and accepted the bribe amount of Rs.1 lakh from Manjunath, the Maintenance Manager of Athreya Hospital. After the filing of the charge sheet, the Court of Sessions for the CBI cases, takes cognizance for the afore-quoted offences against accused No.1 and petitioner/accused No.2 and registers Spl.C.C.2647 of 2022. Taking of cognizance and issuance of summons has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

4. Heard Sri Shivaji H Mane, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri P Prasanna Kumar, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that no bribe amount was recovered from the petitioner to establish a case of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification; the two wheeler in which the petitioner travelled was not subjected to any test nor the ownership details were verified, as the allegation was that the bribe amount was received and directed to be kept in the scooter. Official voice recorder was not used, instead an apple watch was used to record the conversation during the trap proceedings. It is a case of illegal phone recording infringing the privacy of the petitioner. Therefore, the proceeding