IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100411 OF 2023 (A)

BETWEEN:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, THROUGH LOKAYUKTA POLICE DISTRICT KOPPAL.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

AND:

REVANASIDDAPPA KOLKARA S/O PAMPAPATHEPPA AGE 55 YEARS, OCC. TECHNICAL ASSISTANT O/O. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE CHANDRASHEKAR LA XMAN GANGAVATHI DISTRICT KOPPAL, KATTIMANI R/O. BUDAGUMPA 583227.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NEELENDRA D. GUNDE, ADVOCATE)

D CH ig A it N al D ly R s A ig S n H e E d K b A y R THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 378(1)(3) OF CR.P.C., LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2026.02.20 SEEKING GRANT SPECIAL LEAVE AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND

12:33:19 +0530 ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 10/08/2022 PASSED IN SPECIAL. C.C (P.C) NO. 13/2012 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT SESSIONS AND SPECIAL JUDGE, KOPPAL. AND CONSEQUENTLY, CONVICT THE ACCUSED/ RESPONDENT IN SPECIAL C.C. (P.C) NO. 13/2012 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 7, 13 (1) (D) R/W 13(2) OF PC ACT AND IMPOSE MAXIMUM SENTENCE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL JUDGMENT

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

1. Heard Sri. Srinivas B. Naik, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. Neelendra D. Gunde, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. Lokayukta is the appellant challenging the order of dated 10.08.2022 passed in Special Case (P.C.) No.13/2012 by the learned Principal Sessions and Special Judge, Koppal, For short, ‘the Trial Court’, acquitting the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section

13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, For short, ‘P.C. Act’

3. Facts in nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under:

3.1. A complaint came to be lodged by one Sri.

Shrinivas S/o. Satyanarayan with the Lokayukta Police, Koppal, contending that in respect of the pending work with the office of the accused, he had enquired the accused who demanded a sum of Rs.24,000/- as the illegal gratification. Complainant was not willing to meet the said illegal gratification and therefore, he had approached the Lokayukta Police.

3.2. In order to ascertain that the version of the complainant was true, the Lokayukta Police had sent voice recorder to the complainant and after confirming about the demand, they intended to trap the accused.

3.3. Accordingly, the Police Inspector Lokayukta secured the presence of two independent witnesses to act as panchas for the intended trap proceedings.

3.4. In their presence, the complaint averments was read over and the voice recorder was played and a sum of Rs.24,000/- was secured from the custody of the complainant, comprising Rs.1,000/- of 10 notes and Rs.400 of 28 notes. The serial numbers of those notes were recorded on a separate paper and thereafter, phenolphthalein powder was applied to them. A chemical reaction of phenolphthalein powder with the colorless sodium carbonate solution was demonstrated to the pancha witnesses. Thereafter, the Police Inspector directed that accused and PW2/Shadow witness to visit the office of the accused and on demand should hand over the tainted currency to the accused and shadow witness was directed to closely observe the activities that would take place at the time of demand and acceptance of the tainted currency and report to the police.

3.5. Instructions were also given to the complainant that after he hands over the tainted currency to the accused, he should come out and give the signal to the rest of the raid party members. All these activities were recorded into writing in the form of experimental mahazar.

3.6. Subsequently, the team proceeded towards the office of the accused and complainant and shadow witness went inside the office of the accused. Accused told them to wait for sometime and thereafter, it is the co