STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. N. SRINIVASA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant / Lokayukta Police, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dtd. 20/11/2012 in Spl.C.No.86/2010 on the file of the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, wherein the Trial Court acquitted the respondent / accused for the offence punishable under Ss. 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'PC Act').

(2.) Brief facts of the case are as under: It is the case of the prosecution that, the respondent / accused was working as Clerk / Typist in the office of Tahsildar at Devanahalli Taluk. As per the records, he was in charge of issuing revenue records. The land was granted to the complainant in Sy.No.69 of Devaganahalli village measuring 1 acre 13 guntas. He wanted his land to be surveyed. Hence, he applied for some documents relating to the said property. As per the averments of the complaint, there were 40 similar applications were pending for consideration before the respondent. It is stated that, on 12/11/2008, the complainant along with his relative H.Nagaraj stated to have approached the respondent to get his official work done and the respondent stated to have demanded Rs.20,000.00. However, after negotiations, it was settled for Rs.4,000.00. The complainant being not satisfied with the said demand, approached the Lokayukta Police and lodged a complaint as per Ex.P1. The complainant was introduced to other two witnesses namely PWs.2 and 3 and pre-trap panchanama was conducted. As per the instructions of the Lokayukta Police, the complainant along with shadow witness stated to have gone to the office of the respondent. When they approached the respondent, the respondent asked as to whether the complainant had brought the amount. The complainant agreed and stated to have put the amount into the rear pocket of the respondent. Immediately, he went out of the office and signaled the Lokayukta Police. The Lokayukta Police entered into the chamber of the respondent and asked him to produce the tainted notes, conducted search and drawn seizure panchanama and registered the case for the offences stated supra, thereafter conducted investigation and submitted the charge sheet.

(3.) To prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution has examined 5 witnesses namely PWs.1 to 5 and got marked Exhibits P1 to P17 and also got identified M.Os.1 to 10. The Trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, acquitted the respondent for the above said charges. Hence, the appellant is before this Court.