IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 730 OF 2023

BETWEEN:

MR. POOJARAPPA P

S/O LATE POOJARI VEERANNA

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

JUNIOR ENGINEER

WARD NO.77, DATTATRAYA WARD

NO.77, 5TH CROSS

MALLESHWARM, BANGALORE - 03.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI P. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADV.)

AND:

STATE BY KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA

POLICE, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT

REP BY ITS SPP, HIGH COURT OF

KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 01.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI B.B. PATIL, ADV.)

Digitally signed

by NANDINI M THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO S SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05.05.2023 PASSED BY THE XXIII

Location: HI GH

ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE

COURT OF

(P.C.ACT), BENGALURU ON THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE

KARNATAKA

PETITIONER U/S 227 R/W SEC. 239 OF CR.P.C. IN SPL.C.C.NO.1035/2022 AND CONSEQUENTLY DISCHARGE THE PETITIONER FROM THE ALLEGED OFFENCES U/S 7(a) OF

PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

1. Petitioner is before this court in this revision petition filed under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of Cr.P.C, with a prayer to set aside the order dated 05.05.2023 passed in Special C.C.No.1035 of 2022 by the Court of XXIII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge and Special Judge (P.C.Act), Bangalore.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. The petitioner herein is charge sheeted for offence punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by the respondent-police in Crime No.13 of 2021 and the case in Special C.C.No.1035 of 2022 is registered against him before the Court of XXIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge and Special Judge (P.C. Act), Bangalore. In the said proceedings, the petitioner had filed an application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C, with a prayer to discharge him. The said application was opposed by the prosecution by filing objection. The Trial Court, vide the order impugned dated 05.05.2023 has rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section

227 of Cr.P.C, Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the certificate produced by the prosecution as provided under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act with regard to the voice recording of the petitioner and the first informant is defective. He submits that the entire charge sheet is not placed before the Trial Court. The charge sheet does not contain the report from the Forensic Science Laboratory and it is a defective charge sheet. He also submits that the sanction to prosecute the petitioner has not been accorded by a competent authority. The Trial Court has failed to appreciate these aspects of the matter and has erred in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of Cr.PC,.

5. Per contra, learned Spl. PP for the respondent has argued in support of the order impugned. He submits that the petitioner was caught red handed while receiving the bribe amount of ₹15,000/- from the first informant. He also submits that the question of validity of the certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act and the competence of the sanctioning authority etc. are subject matter of trial. The prosecution has already made a request before the Trial Court to produce the Forensic Science Laboratory report, after securing the document and therefore, it cannot be said that the charge sheet is defective. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner who was working as an Assistant Engineer in BBMP, had demanded a sum of Rs.50,000/- as bribe for the purpose of taking action against the alleged illegal construction put up by Mr. Gopi. The conversation between the petitioner and the first informant (CW1) has been recorded in hi