STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. K. PRABHAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal dtd. 31/5/2014 passed in Special Case No.55 of 2010 by the District & Sessions Judge at Chamarajanagar (for short "the trial Court").

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their status and rank before the trial court.

(3.) The case of prosecution is that Police Inspector, Lokayukta, Chamarajanagar laid charge-sheet against the accused for offence punishable under Sec. 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is alleged by the prosecution that accused, being a public servant working as village accountant in revenue department of Kasaba Hobli, Kollegal, demanded illegal gratification of Rs.7,000.00 from the complainant for doing official favour, viz. changing the khata of the land in survey Nos.1043 and 971 situated in Kollegal, Kasaba Hobli to the names of CW1, CW4 and CW5. As CW1-complainant was not willing to pay the bribe amount, he lodged complaint to the Lokayukta Police, which was registered in Crime No.4 of 2009 and FIR was sent to the special Judge. Thereafter on 21/10/2009, at 4:50 pm, in the house situate at Jewellery Street, Kollegal town, when the accused demanded the bribe amount and received the same, the accused was caught red-handed along with the bribe amount by the Lokayukta Police and accordingly, accused committed criminal misconduct by demanding and obtaining pecuniary gratification from the complainant by corrupt and illegal means while holding the office of government servant and thereby accused committed the for offences punishable under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. After filing the charge-sheet, case came to be registered in Special Case No.55 of 2010. Accused appeared before the court and was enlarged on bail. Having heard on charges, the trial Court framed charges for the offences Sec. 7, 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The same were read over and explained to the accused in the language known tot them. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined seven witnesses as PWs1 to 7 and marked twenty documents as Exhibits P1 to P20 and twelve Material Objects as MOs1 to 12. On closure of prosecution side evidence, statement of the accused under Sec. 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded. Accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him and produced his written statement. He has not chosen to lead any defence evidence. Having heard the arguments on both sides, the trial court acquitted the accused. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of acquittal, State has preferred this appeal.