- 1 -

NC: 2023:KHC-K:1060

CRL.A No. 200099 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200099 OF 2016 (374-)

BETWEEN:

1.

JNANOBA S/O RAAMA SHINDHE

AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: PRINCIPAL GOVT. PRE

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, NELOGI, PRESENT OCC:

PRINCIPAL GOVT. PRE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE,

HALLIKHED(K) TQ: HUMNABAD, R/O NO. 421, CIB

COLONY KALABURAGI

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. SATISH KUMAR D GADKAR,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

THROUGH LOKAYUKTA POLICE STATION

KALABURAGI, REPRESENTED BY ITS LOKAYUKTA

PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH

AT KALABURAGI

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. SUBHASH MALLAPUR,ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.A. FILED U/S. 374(2) OF CR.P.C BY THE

ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE

COURT TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN SPECIAL CASE NO.

264/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE,

AT KALABRAGI, PERUSE THE SAME, ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND

SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION AND

SENTENCE DATED 5/7/16 AND SET THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED

AT LIBERTY IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DICTATION, THIS DAY,

THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Digitally signed by

LUCYGRACE

Location: HIGH

COURT OF

KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2023:KHC-K:1060

CRL.A No. 200099 of 2016

JUDGMENT

This appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.PC is filed

challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence

dated 5.7.2016 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge,

Kalaburagi, by which, the accused herein was convicted for the

offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with

Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short

`PC Act') and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period

of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- for the offence

punishable under Section 7 of the PC Act and to undergo

imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of

Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 13(1)(d) punishable

under Section 13(2) of the PC Act.

2.

The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

The accused when working as Principal in the

Government P.U. College at Nelogi, had demanded a sum

of Rs.5,000/- to continue PW1 as guest lecturer. Since

the complainant was not desirous of paying the

gratification amount, he lodged the FIR with the

Lokayukta Police. The Lokayukta police registered the

FIR in Crime No.10/2009 under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d)

read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act.

3.

The

Lokayukta

Police

prepared

a

pre-trap

(entrustment mahazar). Thereafter, the Lokayukta conducted

a trap, and the appellant was found to have received a sum of

Rs.3,000/- as gratification amount from PW1 in the presence of

shadow witness - PW2, who was the witness to the trap

- 3 -

NC: 2023:KHC-K:1060

CRL.A No. 200099 of 2016

panchanama, and seized the tainted money. The learned

Sessions Judge framed the charge against the accused for the

aforesaid offences, and the same was read over and explained

to the accused, to which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to

be tried.

4.

The prosecution to prove its case examined PWs.1

to 11 and exhibited the documents at Ex.P1 to 35 and the

material objects at MOs.1 to 10.

5.

After the evidence of prosecution was concluded,

the incriminating circumstances found in the evidence of

prosecution witnesses were put to the accused as contemplated

under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.PC. The accused denied the said

incriminating circumstances as false, and stated that he has

been falsely implicated for having not released one month

salary to the complainant. The learned Sessions Judge, after

examining the material evidence on record, and also the

arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties,

framed the points for consideration, and reco