- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31927 CRL.P No. 10741 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10741 OF 2025 BETWEEN: DR. THIPPESWAMY P R S/O RAGHAVENDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, VETERNARY HOSPITAL, CHIKKAJAJUR, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA - 577 501. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUDHINDRA B.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY LOKAYUKTHA POLICE STATION, CHITRADURGA, REP BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. SRI. SWAMY S S/O SHIVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT KALAGERE VILLAGE, B DURGA HOBLI, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.C.NO.10/2024 IN CR.NO.7/2023 Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31927 CRL.P No. 10741 of 2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT CHITRADURGA IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 7(a) OF P.C ACT 1988 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA P.S. CHITRADURGA. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking quashing of the proceedings, pending an Spl.CC.No.10/2024 in Crime No.07/2023, for the offences punishable under Sections 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered by respondent No. 1/Karnataka Lokayuktha Police Station, Chitradurga. 2. The gist of the case, as narrated by respondent No.2/complainant, is that respondent No.1, acting upon the information received, laid a trap against the petitioner on 22.05.2023. According to the complainant, on 23.05.2023, as part of the planned trap, a sum of money was allegedly paid by respondent No.2 to the petitioner/accused, who was subsequently apprehended red-handed. Following this, respondent No.1 took up the investigation, and a charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner and the other accused - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31927 CRL.P No. 10741 of 2025 persons in Special C.C. No.10/2024 under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 3. The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking quashing of the proceedings on the ground that the entire case is fabricated. It is contended that one Prabhu, the Secretary of a dairy run at Muthugadur, used to call the petitioner frequently during duty hours for treatment of his cattle. The petitioner, who is in charge of 45 villages, allegedly failed to respond to these repeated calls. It is further submitted that, as a result, a false case was engineered, and the petitioner was allegedly trapped despite there being no demand made by him. The petitioner’s primary defence is that respondent No.2, after completion of the post-mortem of the cattle, requested him to make arrangements for the burial of the animals on respondent No.2’s land. It is asserted that the money received by the petitioner was meant solely to cover burial and other miscellaneous expenses, and not as a bribe. 4. Having considered the submissions and the materials on record, this Court is of the view that, at this stage, when the investigating officer has already laid a charge sheet - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31927 CRL.P No. 10741 of 2025 under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the burden is on the petitioner to substantiate his defence that there was no demand or acceptance of a bribe, and that the money allegedly recovered from him was voluntarily handed over solely to meet burial expenses. The contentions raised by the petitioner constitute a defence which can only be properly adjudicated in the course of a full-fledged trial. 5. In other words, while the petitioner asserts that the amount received was not a bribe but was intended for burial expenses, such factual and legal contentions require examination and proof during trial, and cannot form a basis for quashing the proceedings at this stage. The admitted fact that the petitioner received money, albeit for a purportedly legitimate purpose, cannot lead this Court to grant any indulgence in a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. without a proper trial. 6. For the foregoing reasons, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court holds that the present petition is premature and cannot be entertained at this stage. Liberty is, however, reserved to the petitioner to raise all - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31927 CRL.P No. 10741 of 2025 possible defences and contentions during the course of the trial. Consequently, the captioned petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48