- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2103 CRL.A No. 200108 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200108 OF 2020 (374(Cr.PC)/415(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. T.H. RAJKUMAR S/O HANMANTHAPPA OCC. AGRICULTURE, (PRIVATE SURVEYOR, TAHASIL OFFICE, SEDAM AT THE TIME OF TRAP), R/O. GATTI TIMMANAHALLI, TQ. KORATAGERE, DIST. TUMKUR …APPELLANT (BY Ms VAISHNAVI MANYANE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI RAVI K. ANOOR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH LOKAYUKTA POLICE STATION KALABURAGI, NOW REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, (LOKAYUKTA) HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH KALABURAGI. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SUBHASH MALLAPUR, SPECIAL PROSECUTOR) CRL.A. FILED U/S.374(2) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 04.09.2020 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE AT KALABURAGI IN (S.C. No.) 20/2015(LOKAYUKTA) CONVICTING THE APPELLANT / ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2103 CRL.A No. 200108 of 2020 P/U/S. 7 AND 13(2) R/W SEC. 13(1)(d) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 04.09.2020, in Special Case No.20/2015 (Lokayukta), on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge and Special Judge at Kalaburagi, wherein, he is convicted for the offences under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short ‘PC Act’). 2. The ranks of the parties henceforth will be considered as per their rankings before the Trial Court, for convenience. Factual matrix of the case: 3. The case of the prosecution is that, one Chandrakant s/o Annarao Mudakanalli is the complainant. He stated in his complaint that he owns a property bearing Survey Nos.50/1, 65 and 161/A measuring 08 acres, situated at - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2103 CRL.A No. 200108 of 2020 Totanalli Village. The said properties are standing in the names of himself and his brother. He submitted an application for the purpose of getting survey done to his land. According to him, the accused had demanded a sum of Rs.5,000/- to conduct survey. Therefore, he lodged a complaint before the Lokayuktha Police. In the meantime, he had submitted the conversation recorded by him to the said police. 4. The respondent police registered a case in Crime No.13/2011 for the above said offences. The trap was conducted on 09.11.2011, at about 02.10 p.m. The accused was caught red-handed while demanding and accepting the bribe of Rs.3,000/- from the complainant. After conducting the investigation formalities, charge sheet has been submitted. 5. To prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined 9 witnesses as PWs 1 to 9 and got marked 33 documents as Exhibits P1 to P33 and also identified 13 documents as M.Os.1 to 13. On the contrary, Exhibit D1 is marked on behalf of the accused. After appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court recorded - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2103 CRL.A No. 200108 of 2020 the conviction against the accused for the aforesaid offences. 6. Heard Ms Vaishnavi Manyane, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Subhash Mallapur, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent / Lokayukta. 7. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the appeal deserves to be allowed for the reason that the impugned judgment and order on conviction passed by the Trial Court is contrary to the law, evidence, and facts on record. 8. It is further submitted that, in fact, the complainant had not submitted any applications to the concerned office for the purpose of getting the survey done. Such being the fact, the allegations made against the accused that he had given an application for conducting the survey cannot be sustained and the conviction ought not to have been passed against the accused. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the appellant prays to allow the appeal. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2103 CRL.A No. 200108 of 2020 9. Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent-Lokayuktha justified the judgment of conviction and he further submitted that, both PWs.1 and 2 who are the material witnesses to the incident are consistent in their evidence that the accused had demanded a sum of Rs.5,000/- to conduct the survey of the land, which belongs to the complainant. When the demand and acceptance has been proved by the prosecution, obviously, the presumption has to be raised in favour of the prosecution. Accordingly, the conviction recorded by the Trial Court is proper and there is no occasion for this Court to interfere with the said finding. As such, learned Special Public Prosecutor prays to reject the appeal. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties, it appears that, though the Trial Court recorded the conviction based on the evidence of PWs.1 and 2 and other circumstantial evidence, the fact remains that, P.W.5 who is the Survey Supervisor, as on the date of the alleged incident, has stated in his evidence that the accused was working as a private surveyor attached to - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2103 CRL.A No. 200108 of 2020 his office. As on the date of the alleged incident, there was no application pending for the purpose of conducting the survey. When the application was not at all filed by the complainant, it cannot be said that the accused had demanded the said amount in his official capacity for the purpose of conducting survey. Admittedly, he was working as a private surveyor. It cannot be said he worked on his official capacity and demanded in the same capacity as well. 11. In this view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the Trial Court has committed an error in recording the conviction. Hence, the conviction is liable to be set aside. 12. In the light of the observations made above, I proceed to pass the following order:- ORDER i) The criminal appeal is allowed. ii) The judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 04.09.2020 passed in Special Case (Lokayukta) No.20/2015 by the Principal - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2103 CRL.A No. 200108 of 2020 Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Kalaburagi, is set aside. iii) The appellant / accused is acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. iv) Bail bonds executed if any, stand cancelled. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE TMP/Bss List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79