-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101640/2021

Between

Sri.Sureshagouda,

S/o Shekhargouda Patil,

Age:46 years, Occ:Revenue Inspector,

Gadag, R/o:Kurlageri, Tq:Navalgund District,

Gadag-583201.

...Petitioner

(By Sri. Mohan Kumar & Shankar Hegde Associates, Advocate)

And

The State of Karnataka

By Anti Corruption Bureau Police Station Gadag,

Represented by the Special Public Prosecutor,

High Court Building, Dharwad-580008..

&Respondent

(By Sri.Santosh.B.Malagoudar, Spl. SPP)

This Criminal Petition is filed u/s 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking

to direct the concerned Dy.S.P., Anticorruption Bureau, Police

Station, Gadag, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime

No.05/2021 of Anti Corruption Bureau Police Station Gadag for

an offences punishable under Section 7(A) of the Prevention of

Corruption Act, 1988, in the event of arrest with such conditions

which this Hon9ble High Court deems fit to be imposed in the

circumstances of the case.

-2-

This petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court

made the following:

ORDER

The petitioner/accused No.1 has filed this petition

under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in

the event of his arrest in Crime No.5/2021 of Anti

Corruption Bureau Police Station, Gadag, registered for the

offences punishable under Sections 7(A) of the Prevention

of Corruption Act, 1988.

2.

The brief facts leading to the case are that the

petitioner is working as Revenue Inspector and the

complainant has approached the petitioner for change of

katha of his land and at that time, the petitioner has

demanded R.8,000/- as illegal gratification from the

complainant. In this regard, complaint came to be lodged

on 31.07.2021 and trap has been arraigned. It is further

the case of the prosecution is that on 31.07.2021, ACB

conducted raid in the office of the Revenue Inspector and

there a private assistant engaged by the petitioner was

-3-

caught red handed while accepting bribe amount of

Rs.8,000/- on behalf of the petitioner. The trap mahazar

was done and the statement of the said person who was

trapped was also recorded. The said accused No.2 who

was apprehended and trapped was produced before the

concerned Court and was remanded to judicial custody.

The

petitioner

apprehending

his

arrest

has

moved

anticipatory bail before the learned sessions judge and the

learned sessions judge by his order dated 19.08.2021

dismissed the anticipatory bail petition. Hence, the

petitioner claims to have approached this Court.

3.

Heard the arguments advanced by the learned

counsel for petitioner and the learned counsel appearing

for respondent-Lokayukta. Perused the records.

4.

Learned counsel for petitioner would contend

that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the

petitioner has committed offences as alleged and the

offences

alleged

are

punishable

with

death

or

imprisonment for life. He would also contend that

-4-

petitioner is innocent and there is no direct or indirect

material to show that the petitioner is in any way

connected with the alleged offence. There is no material

evidence to show regarding demand and acceptance on

the part of the present petitioner and the petitioner is no

way concerned with the person who was trapped. He

would also contend that no case is made out against the

present petitioner and there is no reason for rejection of

the anticipatory bail. He would also contend that since

recovery is concluded his presence is no more required by

the Investigating Agency and the custodial interrogation is

not required except for taking voice sample and he is

prepared to give voice sample. He would also undertake to

abide by the terms and conditions to be imposed by this

Court. Hence, he has sought for admitting him on

anticipatory bail.

5.

Per contra, learned SPP has