- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31585 CRL.P No. 9469 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9469 OF 2025 BETWEEN: MR. H.V. YARAPPA REDDY S/O LATE MR. VENKATA REDDY, AGED 54 YEARS, WORKING AS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, B.B.M.P., C.V. RAMAN NAGAR DIVISION, BENGALURU-560 093. RESIDENT OF DOOR NO.960, 9TH MAIN, 3RD ‘A’ CROSS, 1ST BLOCK, H.R.B.R. LAYOUT, KALYAN NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 043. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. I.S. PRAMOD CHANDRA., ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY LOKAYUKTA POLICE BENGALURU CITY REPRESENTED THROUGH THE SPL. PUBLIC PROSECUTORS, KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.S. PRASAD, SPECIAL P.P.) Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31585 CRL.P No. 9469 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.31/2025, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 7(a) OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988, OF KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA BENGALURU CITY, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED XXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE UNDER THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, BENGALURU CITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER This petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is preferred by the petitioner/accused to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.31/2025 registered for the offence punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short ‘PC Act’) by the Karnataka Lokayukta Police, Bengaluru City. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent. Perused the material on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31585 CRL.P No. 9469 of 2025 3. Brief facts:- The BBMP awarded contracts to one M/s BMRG Projects India Pvt. Limited for road and culvert constructions in ward No.88 of Jeevan Bheemanagar, 113 of Konana Agrahara, 79 of Sarvagna Nagar and 80 of Hoysala Nagar under the comprehensive Development project. The said company sub-contracted the execution of the work to the complainant, working as a Contractor. He completed the work and submitted the bills to the concerned authority. Petitioner, working as Executive Engineer, C.V.Raman Nagar Division, Bengaluru was the competent authority to sanction the bills. When the complainant and his friend Mr. Karthik contacted the petitioner via., whatsapp call, he demanded Rs.10,00,000/- for forwarding the bill and refused to accept Rs.5,00,000/-. Unwilling to pay the bribe, a complaint was lodged with the Lokayukta Police. Entrustment mahazar was prepared in the presence of panchas. During trap proceedings conducted on - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31585 CRL.P No. 9469 of 2025 17.06.2025, petitioner was apprehended while accepting the bribe amount of Rs.10,00,000/-. 4. The learned Senior counsel contended that the entire investigation does not reveal any demand of bribe by the petitioner. The tainted cash was not recovered from his exclusive possession, on the other hand, recovered from the boot of the car. The said amount was allegedly kept by one Karthik, complainant’s friend and therefore, knowledge on the part of the petitioner cannot be asserted. The alleged conversation between the complainant and petitioner is a matter for trial. The petitioner was arrested on 17.06.2025. He has been interrogated and not required for further interrogation. He is in judicial custody for nearly two months. He is ready and willing to abide by any conditions and will furnish sufficient surety to ensure his regular presence before the trial Court. 5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor has filed statement of objections. He contended that the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31585 CRL.P No. 9469 of 2025 conversation recorded by the complainant incriminates the petitioner, coupled with recovery of the tainted currency from his possession, showing a prima facie case against him. The hand wash of the accused confirms that he has received bribe from the complainant to do an official favour. He is an influential person, hence, if granted bail, there is likelihood of tampering the prosecution witnesses and destroying vital documents. 6. It is alleged that the petitioner demanded Rs.10,00,000/- from the complainant, working as a Contractor, to do an official favour i.e., to sanction the bills in respect of the work undertaken by him, entrusted by the BBMP to M/s BMRG Projects India Pvt. Ltd. Conversations regarding initial demand made through whatsapp calls are said to have been recorded. As per trap mahazar, complainant’s friend by name Karthik approached the petitioner and handed over the bag containing the tainted currency, which was received by the petitioner and kept in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31585 CRL.P No. 9469 of 2025 the dickey (boot) of the Car. The said bag was then seized at the instance of the petitioner. 7. The prosecution is relying on the telephonic conversations regarding demand of bribe by the petitioner, recovery of the bag containing tainted currency, result of the hand wash of the petitioner and the statements of the witnesses. FSL report with regard to the audio conversation is awaited. 8. According to prosecution, the currency notes as well as the handbag were applied with phenolphthalein powder and the petitioner received the said handbag given to him by complainant’s friend Karthik and kept in the boot of the car. The result of telephone conversations and its authenticity is a matter for trial. The contention of the learned Senior counsel is that demand and acceptance are sine-qua-non to establish the ingredients of the offence under Section 7(a) of the PC Act and in the present case, the same are lacking. It is contended that the trap - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31585 CRL.P No. 9469 of 2025 mahazar does not indicate that there was demand by the petitioner or he received the cash. 9. The prosecution has to establish its case against the petitioner in a full-fledged trial. Petitioner was arrested on 17.06.2025. He has been interrogated. It is submitted that he is under suspension. No such previous antecedents are alleged against him. The refusal of bail would only serve as pre-trial punishment. The apprehension of the prosecution regarding availability of the petitioner for the purpose of trial, possibility of tampering the evidence, can be taken care of by imposing appropriate conditions. The sentence prescribed is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, ensuring a fair balance between individual rights and the interest of justice, by imposing conditions, petitioner can be released on bail. Accordingly, the following: ORDER 1. Petition is allowed. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31585 CRL.P No. 9469 of 2025 2. Petitioner shall be enlarged on bail in Crime No.31/2025 registered by Karnataka Lokayukta Police, Bengaluru City for the offence punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amendment Act, 2018), pending on the file of the XXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Bengaluru City, subject to following conditions:- (a) He shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. (b) He shall furnish his residential address/contact number and shall inform the Investigating Officer in case of change in the address/contact number. (c) He shall co-operate with the investigation of the case and available for investigation whenever necessary. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31585 CRL.P No. 9469 of 2025 (d) 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. (e) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the learned Sessions Judge. (f) He shall appear before the trial Court on all effective dates of hearing without fail. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE SSB/HB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33