- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3288 CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6528 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SIDDAPPA BANAKAR, S/O SADASHIVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT, MADADAKERE CIRCLE, IN CHARGE: LAKKIHALLI CIRCLE, HOSADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA – 577 501. R/AT NEAR JYOTHI TALKIES, VIDYANAGARA, HOSADURGA TOWN, CHITRADURGA – 577 501. R/AT SHIRAGAMBI VILLAGE, RATTIHALLI POST AND TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT – 581 110. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRITHVEESH M. K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA POLICE STATION, CHITRADURGA – 577 501. REPRESENTED BY ITS Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3288 CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024 SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. VIJAYA KUMAR V., S/O LATE ERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT DODDAGATTA VILLAGE, HIRIYURU TALUK, CHITRADURGA – 577 501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.B.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.(PC)NO.05/2023 i.e., 1/2022 PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 7(a) OF P.C. ACT REGISTERED BY LOKAYUKTA P.S., CHITRADURGA AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN i.e., ACCUSED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in Spl.C.(PC) No.5/2023 arising out of Crime No.1/2022 registered for the offence punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' for short). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3288 CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024 2. Heard Sri.Prithveesh M.K., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.B.B.Patil, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1. 3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: 3.1. The petitioner at the relevant point in time was working as Village Accountant in Madadakere circle, Chitradurga. The complainant is the one who was wanting the name in the khata of the revenue records to be changed pursuant to certain transactions. It is said that he approaches the petitioner for the purpose of change of entries in the revenue records or the change of the name in the khata. Without the communication from the hands of the Village Accountant, it could not have been done. The petitioner is said to have demanded bribe of Rs.20,000/-, out of which, Rs.10,000/- was agreed to be paid at the time when the work would be done and the remaining later. The complainant pays Rs.5,000/- and what remains is Rs.5,000/- to be paid. The complainant then approaches the Lokayukta who would prepare a pre-trap proceedings and lay a trap upon the petitioner. The petitioner is caught red handed while accepting the tainted - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3288 CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024 currency of Rs.5,000/-. The phenolphthalein test that the prosecution undertook on the same day was also successful inasmuch as the hands had turned pink. The crime had been registered in Crime No.1/2022 and investigation leads to filing of the charge sheet. The cognizance is taken by the concerned Court on the charge sheet so filed and taking of cognizance has driven the present petitioner to this Court in the subject petition. 4. Learned counsel Sri.Prithveesh M.K., appearing for the petitioner would put up valiant effort in seeking to contend that there is neither demand nor acceptance in the case at hand nor there was any work pending at the hands of the petitioner for him to demand bribe or accept bribe. There is no demand at all in the case at hand and the recordings are not sent to FSL. FSL report is yet to be received and therefore would submit that the charge sheet is short laid against the petitioner and the order of cognizance also does not indicate that cognizance is taken for the offence under Section 7(a) of the Act. On these submissions, learned counsel seeks quashment of the entire proceedings. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3288 CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent Sri. B.B.Patil would vehemently refute the submission in contending that the petitioner is caught red-handed, the trap was successful. It becomes a matter of trial in such circumstances whether there was a demand or otherwise as there is clear acceptance in the case at hand. The presumption under Section 20 of the Act would kick in, once the acceptance is found or the petitioner is caught red-handed on receiving the tainted currency/bribe amount. The learned counsel would submit that the charge sheet is clear and the order of cognizance need not be reasoned once the concerned Court is taking cognizance on the charge sheet. He would seek dismissal of the petition. 6. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The issue revolves around corruption. The petitioner is a Village Accountant, is alleged to have demanded bribe of Rs.5,000/- for performance of a particular action from the hands of the complainant. The conversation between the two is recorded. The recording leads to a pre-trap proceedings being laid against - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3288 CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024 the petitioner. A trap is laid against the petitioner later. In the trap, the petitioner is caught receiving a bribe amount of Rs.5,000/- and a tainted currency test that is necessary to be undertaken i.e., phenolphthalein test is also positive. Under these circumstances, the police conduct investigation and file a charge sheet. The summary of the charge sheet as obtaining in Column No.17 reads as follows: “17. ೇ ೇ ೇ ೇ¹ನನನನ ೋಾ ೋಪೆಯ ೋಾ ೋಪೆಯ ೋಾ ೋಪೆಯ ೋಾ ೋಪೆಯ ವರ ವರ ವರ ವರ:- ಕಲಂ ಕಲಂ ಕಲಂ ಕಲಂ; 7(a) ಭಾಾರ ಭಾಾರ ಭಾಾರ ಭಾಾರ ಪಬಂಧಕ ಪಬಂಧಕ ಪಬಂಧಕ ಪಬಂಧಕ ಾೆ ಾೆ ಾೆ ಾೆ-1988, ಈ ಪಕರಣದ ಾ ! "ಾ#-01 ರವರ ಸಂಬಂ% &ೕಮ.ರಂಗಮ) ರವರು +,ಯೂರು -ಾಲೂ./ ಾಟನಹ2, 3ಾಮದ ಮ4ಾ5ಂಗಪ6 ರವರ 4ೆಸ,3ೆ ಇರುವ 4ೊಸದುಗ -ಾಲೂ./, 8ಾಡದೆ ೆ 4ೋಬ:ಯ ,.ಸ.ನಂ.12/1ರ ಜ<ೕನನು= ಕಯೆ> ಖ,ೕ! 8ಾ@, Aಾ-ೆ 8ಾ@ೊಡುವಂ-ೆ ಾಖBಾಗಳನು= ಆEಾ!ತ ಾದ GದH¥Àà ಬಣಾI ರವ,3ೆ Jೕ@ ಬಂ!ರು-ಾK ೆ. ಸLಲ6 !ನಗಳ ನಂತರ ಆEಾ!ತ ಅ%ಾ,ಯವರು "ಾ#-01 ರವರ ಸಂಬಂ¢ü ರಂಗಮ)ರವರನು= ಕು,ತು ಮ4ಾ5ಂಗಪ6ನ ಮಗNಾದ "ಾಕಮ) ರವರು Aಾ-ೆ 8ಾಡದಂ-ೆ ತಕ ಾರು ಅO ಯ£ÀÄß ೊ2ರು-ಾK ೆ. 4ಾ3ಾP QಾಡಕRೇ, ಹKರ ಬJ= ಎಂದು :Gದ ಾರವನು= ರಂಗಮ) ರವರು "ಾ#-01 ರವ,3ೆ :Gಾಗ "ಾ#-01 ಮತುK ರಂಗಮ) ರವರು !Qಾಂಕ:16.12.2021 ರಂದು ಆEಾ!ತರು ಕತ ವT Jವ +ಸುKರುವ 8ಾಡದೆ ೆ ಕRೇ,3ೆ 4ೋP, ಆEಾ!ತರನು= Uೇ2ಾಾಗ ರಂಗಮ) ರವರ 4ೆಸ,3ೆ ಪಹV ಬರುವಂ-ೆ 8ಾ@ೊಡಲು 10 "ಾ ರ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣೆ> Xೇ@ೆ ಇ2ದುH, "ಾ#-01 ರವರು ಅೊಂದು ಹಣ ೊಡಲು ಆಗಲ. ಎಂಾಗ ಆEಾ!ತರು 8 "ಾ ರ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣೆ> Xೇ@ೆ ಇ2ರು-ಾK ೆ. ನಂತರ !Qಾಂಕ:18.01.2022 ರಂದು "ಾ#-01 ರವರು ಆEಾ!ತರ ಕRೇ,3ೆ 4ೋP ರಂಗಮ)ರವರ ಜ<ೕJನ Aಾ-ೆ ಬ3ೆ[ ಾ,Gಾಗಲೂ ಸಹ ಆEಾ!ತರು 10 "ಾ ರ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣೆ> Xೇ@ೆ ಇ2ರು-ಾK ೆ. "ಾ#-01 ರವ,3ೆ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣವನು= Jೕಡಲು ಇಷ ಲ.ದ ಾರಣ !:01.02.2022 ರಂದು ದೂರ Jೕ@ರು-ಾK ೆ. ಸದ, ಪಕರಣದ ಆ ೋ]ತ ಅ%ಾ,ಾದ GದHಪ6 ಬಣಾI ರವರು "ಾ#-1 ರವರ ಸಂಬಂ% ರಂಗಮ)ರವರು ಖ,ೕ! 8ಾ@ದ ಜ<ೕJನ Aಾ-ೆ ಬದBಾವೆ 8ಾ@ೊಡಲು ಆEಾ!ತರು - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3288 CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024 ತಮ) ಸಾ , ಕತ ವT Jವ +ಸಲು "ಾ#-1 ರವ,3ೆ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣೆ> Xೇ@ೆ ಇಟು, !Qಾಂಕ:01.02.2022 ರಂದು "ಾ#-1 ರವ,ಂದ ಲ^>ಹ:_ 3ಾಮ Bೆಾ>%ಾ,ಗಳ ಕRೇ,ಯ5. 5,000/- ರೂ ಲಂಚದ ಹಣವನು= ಪ`ೆದುೊಂಡು ೆa 4ಾTಂa ಆP G^> b!Hರು-ಾK ೆ. ಆ ೋ]ತನು ಲಂಚದ ಹಣೆ> Xೇ@ೆ ಇಟು, ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ GLೕಕ,Gರುವcದು ಈವ ೆPನ ತJAೆಂದ ಆ ೋ]ತನ dೕBೆ ಆ ೋಪ ಧೃಢಪಟ dೕ ೆ3ೆ ಅಂಕಣ-12 ರ5. ಕಂಡ ಆ ೋ]ತ ಅ%ಾ,ಯ ರುದg dೕಲ>ಂಡ ಕಲಂ ,ೕ-ಾT ೋಾ ೋಪಾ ಪ2ಯನು= ಸ5.Gೆ.” 7. On the charge sheet, the concerned Court takes cognizance of the offence, which reads as follows: “21.10.2023. The Police Inspector, Karnataka Lokayukta, Chitradurga has submitted charge sheet in Cr.No. 01/2022 of ACB (Karnataka Lokayuktha) PS. Chitradurga against the accused Siddappa Banakar for the offence punishable U/sec. 7(a) of PC Act 1988. Charge sheet is verified and found to be correct. Accused is on Court Bail. 23 witnesses are cited in the charge sheet. Properties seized in this case are not produced. One set of prosecution papers is furnished. One set of Accused copy is furnished. FIR., Complaint, PF and other connected papers pertaining to Cr.No. 01/2022 of ACB (Karnataka Lokayuktha) PS, Chitradurga are herewith enclosed. For orders, Sd/- 21/10/23 C.A.O. ORDER Perused the charge sheet and its enclosures. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3288 CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024 Congnizance of the offence P/U/Sec. 7(a)of PC Act. Register as Spl.C (PC). Notify to PP. Issue SS to the Accused. Call on, Sd/- 5/12/2023 Prl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga.” The issue now is whether this Court at this juncture should interfere in a case where a public servant is caught accepting bribe amount. If the petitioner had not received any amount or somebody else had received the amount, then it would have been a different circumstance to be considered. Here the petitioner himself has received the tainted currency/bribe amount, I do not find anything wanting in the procedure followed by the prosecution i.e., Lokayukta in laying the trap or in filing the charge sheet. The charge sheet being in detail and the issue being of corruption, it would mask the order of cognizance though it does contain some reasons which would not be enough reasons in the eye of law. But the petitioner being caught red-handed, this Court would not lend its protective hands to a person/public servant who has been - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3288 CRL.P No. 6528 of 2024 caught red-handed by receiving an amount of Rs.5,000/-. It is for the petitioner to come out clean in a full-blown trial. 8. Petition lacking in merits, stands rejected. It is made clear that the observations made in the course of the order would not bind or influence the trial against the petitioner. The concerned Court shall independently apply its mind and regulate its procedure. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CBC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8 CT:SS