RAMAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the appellant/accused under Sec. 374 Cr.P.C. for setting aside the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court', for brevity) in Special K.L.A. CC No.3/2006, for having found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Sec. 7 and 13(1)(d)(i) R/w. Sec. 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the P.C. Act', for brevity) by convicting and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.2,000.00 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Sec. 7 of the P.C. Act and also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.3,000.00 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months for the offence under Sec. 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) of the P.C. Act.

(2.) Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant Sri. Shankar P. Hegde and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent - Lokayukta Sri. Gurudev I. Gachchinamath,.

(3.) The case of the prosecution is that, the Lokayukta Police filed the charge sheet against the accused for the above said offences alleging that the accused Ramappa Amminabhavi is said to be a Warrant Officer working in Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corporation, Hubballi and the complainant PW1 - Vasappa Ankushkhani was running a timber depot in the plots belonging to the Corporation and earlier the said plots were granted in favour of Mansoor Gunari and G. I.Bochageri. About 22 years ago PW1 came in possession of the said plots and he was paying corporation tax continuously up to date. In spite of the said fact, PW1 came to know that there were some arrears of corporation tax. Hence PW1 met the accused and enquired about the arrears of tax. The accused said to have told him that an amount of Rs.21,189.00 was in arrears as corporation tax and he would reduce the arrears of tax by Rs.10,000.00 if PW1 paid bribe of Rs.5,000.00. The complainant was not willing to pay the bribe amount and hence he lodged the complaint with the Lokayukta Police on 17/11/2005 as per Ex.P1. After registering the case, FIR has been issued by the I.O., they prepared the pre-trap panchanama and demonstration was given to the complainant as well as to the panch witnesses and shadow witnesses. Accordingly, trap was arranged. On 17/11/2005, the complainant - PW1 went inside the office of the accused. The accused was not present in the office. Later he came after attending the meeting and demanded the complainant whether he has brought the bribe amount. Accordingly, PW1 has paid him the tainted amount and the accused demanded and accepted Rs.5,000.00 as bribe. Immediately as per the pre arranged plan, the complainant given the signal by wiping his face with the handkerchief. Immediately PW4 and the members of the raiding party went inside the office of the accused and apprehended the accused. They asked the explanation of the accused. The accused has offered explanation that he has not received any bribe amount, but he has received money towards the part payment of tax at the request of the complainant. The explanation was not accepted and also denied by PWs. 1 and 2. Accordingly, the accused was arrested. The hand wash of the accused was taken. The sodium carbonate solution turned to pink colour. Thus, the accused was trapped. Accused was taken to custody and remanded to judicial custody. Thereafter the I.O. completed the remaining formalities of recording of statements of concerned witnesses and obtaining the sanction order. After completion of investigation, the I.O. filed the charge sheet.