SRIDHARA RAIKAR Vs. STATE BY LOKAYUKTA POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant being the accused in Special (P.C.) Case No. 1 of 2000 on the file of the learned Special Judge at Shivamogga, is impugning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 21/5/2012, convicting him for the offences punishable under Ss. 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988 (for short, 'the P.C Act'), sentencing to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs.2,000.00 for the offence punishable under Sec. 7 of PC Act, and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.2,000.00 for the offence punishable under Sec. 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the P.C. Act, with default sentences.

(2.) Brief facts of the case as made out by the prosecution are that, the accused was the public servant working as a Revenue Inspector at Holalur, I Hobli of Shivamogga. The informant-PW.6 approached the accused in connection with the application submitted by Smt.Subhadramma-the sister-in-law of PW.6, seeking change of katha in her name in respect of properties that were owned by her late husband. The accused demanded illegal gratification of Rs.1,000.00 to do the official favour and after bargaining, it was scaled down to Rs.600.00, out of which, the complainant paid Rs.100.00 on 19/11/1999. The accused insisted for payment of balance amount of Rs.500.00. Since the informant was not interested in paying the illegal gratification, he lodged the first information as per Ex.P9 with Lokayukta Police. On the basis of same, the Police registered the FIR for the above said offences. The Lokayukta Police summoned the other two public servants, prepared pre- trap panchanama as per Ex.P1, entrusted the currency notes smeared with phenolphthalein powder-(MO.9) to the informant, and asked him to meet the accused. The Investigation Officer also directed the shadow witness-PW.1 to accompany PW.6 and to observe the conduct of the accused. The pancha witness- PW.2 was asked to accompany the Investigating Officer and to wait outside the office for the signal to be given by the complainant in case the accused demands and accepts the illegal gratification.

(3.) It is the contention of the prosecution that, the accused demanded and accepted the bribe money and kept it in his pant pocket. The complainant gave signal to the Investigating Officer, upon which the I.O along with pancha rushed to the spot and trapped him. Subsequently, they asked the accused to wash his hands in the sodium carbonate solution, collected the samples, asked the accused to produce the tainted amount, seized MO.9 produced by the accused from his pant pocket, obtained his explanation for being in possession of the tainted amount, seized the case file, got the sanction order as per Exhibit P10, and after completing the investigation, filed the charge sheet against the accused.