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) 61179

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200102/2015

BETWEEN:

Khurshid Hussain S/o Iftekar Ahmed,

Age : 44 years, Occ: SDA in Panchayath Raj

Engineering Sub-Division Office, Devadurga,

R/o Hussain Alam Street, Yadgir.

… Appellant

(By Sri Anilkumar Navadagi and

Sri Shivanand V.Pattanshetti, Advocates)

AND:

The State of Karnataka

R/by Special P.P.

High Court of Karnataka,

Kalaburagi Bench.

(Through PSI of Lokayukta P.S.,

Raichur)

… Respondent

(By Sri Subhash Mallapur, Spl. PP)

This Criminal appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of

Criminal Procedure Code praying to set aside the judgment

of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.09.2015 and

29.09.2015 respectively passed by the II Addl. Dist. &

2

Sessions Judge, Raichur in Special Case No.18/2011 and

acquit the appellant/accused.

This appeal coming on for Final Hearing this day, the

Court delivered the following:

Accused who suffered an order of conviction in

Special Case No.18/2011 on the file of II Addl. District and

Sessions Judge, Raichur (Special Judge) by judgment

dated 28.09.2015 has preferred this appeal.

2.

Brief facts of the case are as under :-

Upon a complaint lodged by Balappa S/o Rangayya,

Lokayukta Police, Raichur registered a case in Crime

No.18/2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 7,

13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of

Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘P.C.Act’

for brevity). In the complaint, it is contended that he is

working as a Gangman in Panchayat Raj Engineering, Sub-

Division, Devadurga and in the year 1991 his appointment

was confirmed by the Government and he was entitled for

time bound increment. The other Gangman had also filed

3

appeals before the court and the court has allowed their

appeals and therefore, he also filed an application seeking

for grant of time bound increment and arrears of salary.

He enquired the accused Khurshid Hussain in that regard

and he told that all other Gangman have paid a sum of

`2,500/- and if he also pay a sum of `2,500/-, he would

prepare the time bound increment order and he would also

prepare the arrears bill. Subsequently, the bribe amount

was initiated and it was fixed at `1,500/-. Even that

amount the complainant was not ready to pay the said

sum as illegal gratification for processing his application,

himself and others decided not to part with the illegal

gratification have approached Lokayukta and lodged a

complaint. Police being convinced about the genuineness

of the complaint averments, arranged for the trap by

securing `1,500/- from the complainant and smeared the

phenolphthalein powder to currency notes. Police secured

three currency notes of `500/- denomination and secured

two panch witnesses and in their presence, the complaint

averments were read over and the colour test was

4

demonstrated and entrustment mahazar was drafted.

Thereafter, the complainant was required to visit the office

of the accused and handover the bribe amount on demand

made by the accused along with shadow witness.

Accordingly, the complainant tried to part with the tainted

money to the accused on 15.12.2010 but it was

unsuccessful. Again, on 20.12.2010 again trap was laid.

On that day, complainant visited the office of the accused

at about 4.15 p.m. and on demand made by the accused

handed over the tainted currency notes to his hands in the

presence

of

the

shadow

witness.

Immediately

pre

designated signal was given to the raid party. Raid party

arrived on the scene and raided the accused and recovered

the tainted currency notes from the tray kept on his table

and conducted the colour test. Colour test stood positive

and the raid party arrested the accused and seized the

tainted currency notes and drafted trap mahazar.

5

3.

Subsequently, the matter was investigated in

detail and charge-sheet came to be filed against the

accused.

4.

Presence of the accused was secured by the

learned Special Judge and necessary charges were framed

for the aforesaid offences. Accused having understood the

substance of the charge, denied the charge. Accordingly,

trial was held.

5.

On order to prove the case of the prosecution,

prosecution examined 15 witnesses and relied on 29

documents which were exhibited and marked as Exs.P.1 to

P.29 and 08 material objects were also marked on behalf

of the prosecution as MOs.1 to 8.

6.

On conclusion of the prosecution evidence,

accused statement was recorded as is contemplated under

Section 313 of Cr.P.C. Accused denied the incriminatory

materials found against him. However, he furnished the

written submissions on his behalf as is contemplated under

Section 313(5) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, trial Judge heard the

6

parties in detail and passed an order of conviction

convicting the accused for the aforesaid offences and

passed an order of sentence as under:-

Offence

Punishment

Fine

Default

sentence

Section 7 of P.C.Act

Rigorous

imprisonment

of t

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