IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.100144 OF 2016 BETWEEN THE STATE OF KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA POLICE, POLICE INSPECTOR, KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, POLICE WING, BELAGAVI.

REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA.

...APPELLANT (BY SRI. ANIL KALE, ADVOCATE)

AND BALAKRISHNA S/O. NARAYAN BIRJE AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: FDA IN APMC BELAGAVI, R/O. 244/6, TAHASILDAR GALLI, BELAGAVI.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI M.H. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

CHANDRASHEKAR THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 378(1) AND (3) OF LAXMAN KA TTIMANI CR.P.C., SEEKING TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL PASSED BY THE IVTH ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS & SPECIAL JUDGE, AT BELGAVI, DATED D CH ig A it N al D ly R s A ig S n H e E d K b A y R 31/7/2015 IN SPL. C. NO. 43/2012 AND TO SET ASIDE THE LAXMAN K D A at T e T : I 2 M 0 A 2 N 6. I 02.12 JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL PASSED BY THE IVTH ADDL.

16:54:58 +0530 DISTRICT AND SESSIONS & SPECIAL JUDGE, AT BELGAVI, DATED 31/07/2015 IN SPL. C. NO. 43/2012 AND TO CONVICT AND SENTENCE THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED PERSON FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 7, 13(1), (d) R/W SEC. 13(2) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 28.01.2026 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)

Appeal by the State challenging the Judgment of acquittal recorded in Special Case No.43/2012 dated 31.07.2015 by the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (PCA), Belagavi.

2. Facts of the case in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under:

A complaint came to be lodged with Lokayuktha police contending that complainant is having a vegetable vending shop in Anantshayana Galli, Belagavi, for last 10 years. Father of the complainant is having a plot bearing No.18 in the APMC yard and complainant wanted to construct a shop in the said plot. In that regard, an application was filed on 24.12.2007 seeking permission for construction.

However due to financial constraint complainant could not construct the shop immediately. As such, on 11.11.2010 he contacted the office of the APMC for obtaining necessary permission.

3. It is further contented that accused-respondent who was working as a First Division Assistant in the APMC Office, did not respond properly on and from 16.09.2011. Whenever the complainant contacted the accused, he used to reply that he would visit his shop and then decide about according permission. 4. As such, at about 8.30 p.m. on 16.09.2011 the accused visited the shop of the complainant. At that juncture, friend of the complainant by name Abhijith was also present.

Complainant requested the accused to accord permission.

5. To get the permission sanctioned as per the application, accused said to have demanded Rs.35,000/- as illegal gratification. The conversation was recorded by Abhijith on his mobile telephone and the same was intimated to the Lokayukta police.

6. After receipt of the complaint, for the intended raid, Lokayukta police secured two independent Government servants as panchas and 35 currency notes of Rs.1,000/- denomination and recorded the serial numbers of the said currency notes on a separate paper. Phenolphthalein powder was smeared on those currency notes and demonstrated the chemical reaction of phenolphthalein powder with the sodium carbonate solution. An experimental mahazar was drafted.

7. Complainant and shadow witness were told to go to the office of the accused and on demand, to hand over the tainted currency notes. The shadow witness was told to observe the activities that could take place at the time of handing over the tainted currency notes.

8. Photographs of the experimental chemical reaction were taken. Thereafter, trap was conducted, trap mahazar was drawn. The accused was arrest