IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 1306 OF 2026 (438(Cr.PC) /

482(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. SRI S LINGAIAH S/O LATE SRI. SANNALINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS R/AT DANDEKERE VILLAGE HUNASEHALLI, GOWDAGERE SIRA TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT.

NOW TEMPORARILY STAYING AT No.311, 'KUMARA KRUPA' GUEST HOUSE SHIVANANDA CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI ABHINAV ANAND K, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJAS HRI AND:

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY LOKAYUKTHA POLICE, TUMAKURU CITY.

REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BENGALURU-560 001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI MANISH R, ADVOCATE SRI B B PATIL, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 Cr.PC (FILED UNDER SECTION 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT HIM ANTICIPATORY BAIL BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION DIRECTING THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER OF LOK AYUKTHA POLICE TUMKUR OR THE HON’BLE VII ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL.JUDGE TUMKUR TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.No.7/2025 OF LIK AYUKTHA POLICE TUMAKUR UNDRE SEC.7(a) OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION (AMENDMENT PROVISION OF 2018)THE VII ADDL.DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AND SPECIAL JUDGE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by accused No.2 under Section

482 of BNSS praying to grant anticipatory bail in Cr.No.07/2025 of Lokayukta Police Station, Tumkur registered for offence under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is working as President of the school in which accused No.1 is working as a Head Master.

The name of this petitioner is not found in the averments of the complaint. The petitioner is not arrayed as accused in the FIR. The petitioner is ready to co-operate with the police in the investigation. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. The offence alleged against the petitioner is not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioner has not received any bribe amount. With this he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent would contend that the one Guru is working as personal assistant of this petitioner. Lohith is son of the said Guru. The bribe amount of Rs.23,000/- has been transferred by Phonepe by the complainant to said Lohith. The said Lohith, who is having another Rs.79,000/- pertaining to the petitioner and out of that Rs.79,000+23,000 = Rs.1,02,000/- he has paid Rs.9,000/- towards rent and paid remaining Rs.93,000/- to the wife of this petitioner by name Mangala. The said transactions are all taken place online and there are documents collected in that regard. The conversation reduced in the mahazar indicate there is a demand of bribe and acceptance of bribe. There is no apprehension of arrest of the petitioner. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

5. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has perused FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

6. This court, while granting bail to accused No.1 in the order dated 02.12.2025 passed in Crl.P.No.14942/2025 has observed as under:

“ 6. The case of prosecution is that, the complainant has applied for grant of paternity leave for fifteen days and earned leave for five days. The petitioner being Headmaster of the school wherein the complainant is working as Second Division Assistant stated to have demanded Rs.23,000/- as a bribe for sanction of paternity and earned leave. The alleged demand made by the petitioner is stated to have been recorded by the complainant in his mobile and memory card has been seized. There is no trap. As per the learned counsel for the respondent, the a