In corruption trap cases, since the bulk of the investigation is typically completed on the day of the trap, custodial interrogation is often unnecessary, making the accused eligible for bail provided there are no criminal antecedents and their presence can be secured for trial.

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJAS HRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 Cr.PC (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN CR.No.4/2026 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT I.E., KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA POLICE, BENGLAURU CITY, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 7(a) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL ORDER

1. This petition is filed by the sole accused under Section 483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in Crime No. 4/2026 of Karnataka Lokayuktha Police, Bengaluru, registered for offence punishable under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act.

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

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that petitioner was working as a Police Inspector in K.P. Agrahara Police Station and he had registered Crime Nos. 12/2026 and 28/2026 against the complainant for offences under BNS and BUDS Act. It is alleged in the complaint that the petitioner had demanded Rs.5,00,000/- to drop the complainant from the said cases. Trap has been laid and petitioner has been found receiving Rs.4,00,000/-. Trap mahazar has been drawn. Bait amount has been seized. In trap cases, major portion of the investigation will be over on the day of the trap. Petitioner is in judicial custody since 29.01.2026. As major portion of the investigation is over petitioner is not required for further custodial interrogation. Petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra learned counsel for respondent would contend that there is clear recording of conversation between the petitioner and the complainant and it has been reduced into writing in the pre-trap mahazar. There is also conversation recorded at the time of trap and it is also reduced into writing in the trap mahazar. Petitioner was found receiving Rs.4,00,000/- at the time of trap. The hand wash of the petitioner was positive for Phenolphthalein test. There is clear demand and acceptance of the bribe. With this he prayed to reject the petition.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties the Court has perused FIR, complaint, mahazars and other materials placed on record.

6. Petitioner was working as Police Inspector in K.P. Agrahara Police Station. Petitioner had registered Crime Nos. 12/2026 and 28/2026 against the accused persons. It is the case of complainant that in order to drop the complainant from the said crimes petitioner had demanded Rs.5,00,000/-, he had paid Rs.1,00,000/- as advance and agreed to pay remaining amount of Rs.4,00,000/-. Trap has been laid and during the trap petitioner was found receiving Rs.4,00,000/- from the complainant. Trap mahazar has been drawn. Hand wash of the petitioner was found positive for Phenolphthalein test. In trap cases major portion of the investigation will be over on the day of trap, except for receiving the FSL report. Petitioner is in judicial custody since 29.01.2026. As major portion of the investigation is over, he is not required for further custodial interrogation. Petitioner is a Police Inspector and his presence can be secured easily for further investigation and trial. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner.

7. Considering the above aspects, petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail with conditions. In the result, the following;

O R D E R

Petition is allowed. Petitioner is granted bail in Crime No. 4/2026 of Karn