- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5629 CRL.P No. 494 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 494 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI. G. S. DINESH S/O. LATE R. SRINIVASA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, WORKING AS REVENUE INSPECTOR, MULKI HOBLI, MULKI TALUK, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT R/AT 2-139/38, 5TH FLOOR, BROADWAY ELITE APARTMENT, HOSABETTU, KULAI POST, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT -574227. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAIK VENKATRAMAN NAGAPPA.,ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE BY LOKAYUKTHA POLICE MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU 560001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.B.S. PRASAD., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5629 CRL.P No. 494 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 (FILED U/S.483 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL TO PETITIONER IN CRIME NO.8/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 7(a) AND 12 OF PC ACT 1988, (AMENDED 2018) REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT LOKAYUKTHA POLICE, MANGALURU PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE D.K., MANGALURU; THE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K., MANGALURU HAS DISMISSED THE BAIL PETITION ON 08.01.2025 IN CRIME NO.8/2024. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent/Lokayukta Police and perused the material on record. 2. Petitioner is accused in Crime No.8/2024 of Lokayukta Police Station, Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada District, registered for offence punishable under section 7(a) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption [Amendment] Act, 2018. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5629 CRL.P No. 494 of 2025 3. In the complaint lodged by one Satheesha Jayasheela Shetty, it is stated that the complainant's grand mother Padmavathi had executed a will dated 18.01.2008 in favour of her family members in respect of a land situated in Panja village, Mulki Taluk. She passed away on 13.10.2017. The complainant filed an application on 29.09.2023 before the Tahsildar of Mulki Taluk to enter the names of his family members in terms of the will executed by his grand mother. He came to know that said application was pending before the Revenue Inspector. Since no action was taken on his application wherein he had sought for effecting the names of his family members in the RTC, he contacted the petitioner, working as Revenue Inspector. However, the petitioner demanded a bribe of Rs.4,00,000/- from the complainant to do the work and also bribe of Rs.1,00,000/- to the document writer. 4. As per prosecution, on 19.12.2024, Lokayukta Officials successfully laid a trap and recovered a sum of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5629 CRL.P No. 494 of 2025 Rs.4,00,000/- from a person by name Manish, who was sent by the petitioner herein. 5. Learned Special Prosecutor has filed statement of objections. He has contended that material on record clearly reveal that the petitioner informed the complainant to meet one Supreetha at the office of one Girish Shetty, an advocate at Kuchigudde Commercial Complex. When the complainant went to the office of Girish Shetty, he was informed by the petitioner to handover the amount to Supreetha. Thereafter, the complainant requested the petitioner that he will meet him at the ground floor of the Complex and later, petitioner sent one Maneesh, who collected the bribe amount on behalf of the petitioner and the said amount has been recovered from Maneesh. He contended that the statement of Maneesh has been recorded and he is the prime witness in the case. He contended that there are telephonic conversations between the accused and complainant coupled with recovery of tainted currency and therefore there is a prima - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5629 CRL.P No. 494 of 2025 facie case against the accused and petitioner being a public servant, has demanded bribe from the complainant to do an official favour and there are prima facie materials against him and therefore, he is not entitled for bail. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has neither demanded nor accepted any amount as alleged and the amount is also not recovered from his possession. He contended that, in fact, trap allegedly conducted by the police failed and subsequently, they have managed to implicate the petitioner alleging that at his instance, one Maneesh has collected the amount. He contended that offences alleged are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, the petitioner is arrested and interrogated and not required for any further interrogation and he is ready and willing to abide by any conditions. Accordingly, he sought to allow the petition. 7. The material on record reveal that Police have conducted trap on two occasions, viz., on 12.12.2024 and - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5629 CRL.P No. 494 of 2025 16.12.2024 and on both occasions, trap failed. Subsequently on 19.12.2024, once again trap was laid wherein, the complainant is alleged to have handed over the bribe amount to one Maneesh from whom, the amount was recovered. According to prosecution, said amount was received by Maneesh at the behest of petitioner herein. 8. The prosecution has to establish its case against the petitioner in a full-fledged trial. Petitioner has been interrogated and he is not required for further interrogation. Entire investigation seems to have been completed. The question of derailing the investigation does not arise as statements of material witnesses are already recorded, which are depicted in the trap mahazar. The petitioner has undertaken to furnish adequate surety to ensure his presence before Trial Court. Hence, by imposing necessary conditions, the petitioner can be released on bail. Accordingly, the following - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:5629 CRL.P No. 494 of 2025 ORDER Petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused in Crime No.8/2024 of Lokayukta Police Station, Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada District, shall be enlarged on bail, subject to following conditions: 1. He shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. 2. He shall furnish proof of his residential address and shall inform the Court, if there is change in the address. 3. He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:5629 CRL.P No. 494 of 2025 4. He shall appear before the trial Court regularly on all dates of hearing. Violation of any of the condition shall result in cancellation of bail. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE NV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15