S. MANJU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the petitioner/Accused No.1 under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in Crime No.1/2022 of Karnataka Lokayuktha, Madikeri registered for the offences punishable under Sec. 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amendment Act 2018), pending on the file of Prl. District and Sessions Court, Kodagu District, Madikeri.

(2.) The brief factual matrix leading to the case are that the complainant is a member of a Co-operative society and the same was sought to be registered by moving an application before the concerned Registrar. It is further alleged that for registering and issuing a challan, the accused being the inspector of Co-operative Society has demanded Rs.10,000.00 and subsequently, scaled it down to Rs.9,000.00. The office bearers of the concerned Society were not interested in paying the bribe and asked the complainant to record the conversation of demand and acceptance and lodge a complaint before Lokayuktha Police. According to the complainant, he recorded conversation that has taken between him and the petitioner and lodged a complaint before the Lokayuktha police. The Lokayuktha police then arranged a trap after drawing pre-trap mahazar and the complainant was sent along with a shadow witness to approach the petitioner. They approached the petitioner in his office and in the toilet it is alleged that the petitioner has demanded and accepted Rs.8,000.00. Then the complainant has passed a signal as directed to him earlier and the Lokayuktha officials raided the spot and apprehended the present petitioner and his hand wash was taken which was shown positive to phenolphthalein test and then the amount was also recovered from his custody. A trap mahazar was also drawn at the spot and then he was produced before the concerned Spl.Court and was remanded to custody. Later on, the petitioner has moved a regular bail petition before the learned Spl.Court and the Spl.Court has rejected the bail petition. Hence, he is before this Court.

(3.) Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for respondent-Lokayuktha. Perused the records.