- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:976 CRL.P No. 104914 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104914 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SHANMUKHAPPA, S/O GOLAPPA KICHADI, AGED 38 YEARS, OCC. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE, APMC, DHARWAD, R/O. SA.BISARAHALLI, KALGHATGI, DHARWAD-581204. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MOHANKUMAR M. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHANKAR P. HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, DHARWAD REP BY SPL.P.P. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD-580011. 2. VITTAL S/O NAGENDRASA PAWAR AGED 27 YEARS WORKING AS BUSINESSMAN R/O. OLD HUBBALLI, NEKAARNAGAR, RAGHAVENDRA CIRCLE 580024, DIST. DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SANTOSH B. MALAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE SERVED TO R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. 1973, (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS FROM SPL. [ACB] CC. NO. 07/2022 BEFORE THE III ADDL. DISTRICT Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:976 CRL.P No. 104914 of 2025 AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AND SPL. JUDGE FOR CBI/KLA/ACB CASES DHARWAD AND QUASH CHARGE SHEET FILED IN SPL. [ACB] CC. NO. 07/2022 BEFORE THE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AND SPL. JUDGE FOR CBI/KLA/ACB CASES DHARWAD, FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 7[A] OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION [AMENDMENT] ACT, 2018 (ANNEXURE-C), THE FIR BEARING ACB DHARWAD PS CRIME NO. 14/2019 CAME TO BE FILED AGAINST THE PETITIONER ON 14/10/2019 FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 7(A) OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION AMENDMENT ACT, 2018 [VIDE ANNEXURE-A] AND ALL CONSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS BY EXERCISING POWER U/S. 482 OF CR.P.C. INSOFAR PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO-2 IS CONCERNED, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri Mohankumar M., for Sri Shankar P.Hegde, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Santosh B.Malagoudar, learned counsel for respondent No.1/Lokayukta. 2. Petition filed by the accused No.2 in Special (ACB) C.C.No.7/2022 with the following prayer: i. “Call for entire records from Spl. [ACB] CC. No.07/2022 before the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, and Spl. Judge for CBI/KLA/ACB cases Dharwad. ii. Quash charge sheet filed in Spl. [ACB] CC. No. 07/2022 before the III Addl. District and Sessions - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:976 CRL.P No. 104914 of 2025 Judge, and Spl. Judge for CBI/KLA/ACB Cases Dharwad, for offences punishable under section 7[a] of the Prevention of Corruption [Amendment] Act, 2018 (Annexure-C), the FIR bearing ACB Dharwad PS Crime No. 14/2019 came to be filed against the petitioner on 14/10/2019 for offences punishable under section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Amendment Act, 2018 [vide Annexure-A] and all consequent proceedings by exercising power u/s. 482 of Cr.P.C. insofar petitioner/accused No-2 is concerned, in the interest of justice and equity.” 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present case is as under: 3.1 Sri Vittal son of Nagendrasa Pawar lodged a complaint with ACB, Dharwad, which came to be registered in Crime No.14/2019 against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 3.2 The gist of the complaint would reveal that complainant applied necessary permission for commencing the vegetable and grain supply broker business by submitting the necessary document to APMC, Dharwad. The complainant handed over the necessary documents to the petitioner, who was - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:976 CRL.P No. 104914 of 2025 a computer operator and paid the prescribed fee of ₹2,000/- by way of demand draft. 3.3 On 09.10.2019, complainant and his friend went to the office of the petitioner to enquire about the pending application. At that juncture, the present petitioner said to have told them to speak to accused No.1-Vijay Kumar. 3.4 It is further alleged that accused No.1 at that juncture demanded bribe of ₹10,000/- which was negotiated and reduced to ₹6,000/-. Conversation was recorded and thereafter complaint came to be lodged. 3.5 Complainant was not interested in parting away with illegal gratification and therefore, he approached the Lokayukta Office and necessary proceedings took place and experimental mahazar was drafted and the amount of ₹6,000/- was received and after smearing the phenolphthalein powder, it was handed over to the accused. Trap was a successful trap and thereafter charge sheet came to be filed. Thereafter, detailed investigation has taken place and charge sheet came to be filed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:976 CRL.P No. 104914 of 2025 3.6 Presence of the accused was secured and charges were framed and accused pleaded not guilty. Therefore, trial has been held. Eight witnesses have been examined according to the counsel for respondent and trial has progressed to a considerable extent. 4. Sri Mohan Kumar for Sri Shankar P.Hegde, learned counsel for petitioner would contend that there is no material evidence placed on record. He would further contend that prosecution has not been able to prove the case by placing necessary evidence on record as the material witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution. Therefore, continuation of the criminal proceedings would only result in futile exercise and sought for quashing of the pending proceedings in Spl. [ACB] C.C.No.7/2022. 5. Per contra, Sri Santosh B.Malagoudar, learned counsel for Lokayukta would contend that trial has been commenced and therefore, it should reach its logical end either in acquittal or conviction on adjudicating the merits of the matter and there cannot be any other order and sought for dismissal of the petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:976 CRL.P No. 104914 of 2025 6. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the metal on record meticulously. 7. On such perusal of the material on record, it is to be noted that when the charge sheet is filed and trial has commenced after accused has pleaded not guilty, except in rarest of the rare circumstances, there cannot be any interdiction of the proceedings and the pending criminal case has to reach its logical end either in acquittal or conviction. 8. Since the scope of the enquiry in a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is limited and not with an intention to hold the mini trial, this Court is of the considered opinion that if the trial is directed to be expedited and disposed of in a time bound manner ends of justice would be met. 9. Accordingly, following: ORDER i. Petition is dismissed. ii. Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE CLK_Ct-cmu