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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 56080

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200104/2015

BETWEEN:

State of Karnataka

Represented by

Special Public Prosecutor (Lokayukta),

High Court of Karnataka,

Kalaburagi Bench.

… Appellant

(By Sri Subhash Mallapur, Spl.PP for Lokayukta)

AND:

Ramesh S/o Genusingh Rathod,

Age : 37 years, Occ : FDA,

District Backward Classes and

Minorities Welfare Office, Gulbarga,

R/o Quarter No.15/3, PWD Quarters,

Old Jewargi Road, Gulbarga.

… Respondent

(By Sri Avinash A.Uplaonkar and

Sri Ravi K.Anoor, Advocates)

This Criminal appeal is filed under Section 378(1)

and (3) of the Cr.P.C praying to grant leave to appeal

against the judgment and order of acquittal dated

2

07.07.2015 passed in Special Case No.577/2010 on the file

of the Principal Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi whereby

acquitting

the

accused/respondent

for

the

offence

punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2)of the

P.C.Act, 1988.

This appeal coming on for Further Hearing this day,

the Court delivered the following:

The present appeal is filed by the State/Lokayukta

challenging

judgment

passed

in

Special

Case

No.577/2010 dated 07.07.2015 on the file of Principal

District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi.

2.

Brief facts of the case are as under :-

One Mahesh lodged a complaint with Lokayukta

Police

on

25.02.2009

stating

that

his

cousin

Smt.Akkamahadevi has applied for Staff Nurse post and

she has been serving as Staff Nurse in Primary Health Care

Centre, Hasinapur village in Shorapur Taluk and she has to

furnish the caste certificate for the purpose of drawing

salary and she had applied the same to the District

Backward Classes and Minority Welfare Office, Kalaburagi.

3

In that regard, the complainant met one Ramesh

(accused) who in turn demanded for `2,000/- as illegal

gratification for furnishing the caste certificate. Since the

complainant was not interested in paying the same, the

discussion took place and it was reduced to

`1,000/-.

Complainant was not even interested for the said amount

and therefore, he approached the Lokayukta Police. Being

convinced about the conservation that took place between

the accused-Ramesh and the complainant, Lokayukta

Police registered a case in Crime No.2/2009 for the

offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with

Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and

arranged for the trap. On the same day at about 5.15 p.m.

in the evening the accused met the complainant in Shanthi

Sagar Hotel and near the pan shop, the accused took the

illegal gratification of a sum of `1,000/- which was in the

denomination of two `500/- currency notes smeared with

phenolphthalein powder and pre-signal was given and trap

party raided on the accused and recovered the tainted

money from the custody of the accused and conducted the

4

colour test and arrested the accused and drafted a trap

mahazar. Thereafter, accused was arrested and the matter

was investigated and Lokayukta police filed charge-sheet.

3.

Presence of accused was secured before the

learned Magistrate and Charge was framed. Accused

pleaded not guilty and trial was held.

4.

In order to prove the case of the prosecution,

prosecution in all examined 13 witnesses as PWs.1 to 13

and relied on 23 documents which were exhibited and

marked as Exs.P1 to P.23. 10 material objects were also

relied on by the prosecution, which were marked as MOs.1

to 10.

5.

On conclusion of the prosecution evidence,

accused statement as contemplated under Section 313 of

Cr.P.C was recorded. Wherein the accused has denied all

the the incriminatory materials found against him and has

answered before the court that he would submit written

submissions before the court as is contemplated under

Section 313(5) of Cr.P.C. Likewise, he has furnished the

5

written submission wherein he has stated that he has not

obtained any money from the complainant-Mahesh and the

tainted money was trusted into his pant pocket by the

complainant with ulterior motive.

6.

Taking note of these aspects of the matter and

also taking note of the admissions given by PW.10 who is

actual applicant who sought for issuance of caste

certificate, the learned trial Judge acquitted the accused by

the impugned judgment.

7.

Being aggrieved by the same, the Lokayukta

has preferred the present appeal with the following

grounds :-

That, the Trial Court has without proper appreciation of the

evidence and material placed on record by the prosecution

has proceed to pass the judgment and order acquitting the

accused/respondent for the offences he has been charge

sheeted, hence the same is liable to be set aside.

That, the reasons assigned by the learned Special Judge

while passing the order of acquittal of the charged offence

are not justifiable and unsustainable in the eye of law.

That, the prosecution has examined in all 13 witnesses as

PW-1 to PW-13 and got marked Ex P-1 To P-23. All the

6

witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution.

PW-1 & 2 who are the punch witnesses have deposed

before the court regarding drawi

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