Manjunathan M Vs the State of Karnataka by

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:34280 CRL.P No. 13050 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13050 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MANJUNATHAN M AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O MURUGESHAN, JUNIOR ASSISTANT METER READER, OFFICE OF ASSISTANT ENGINEER, WORK AND MAINTENANCE SECTION, 3-C1, SUB DIVISION, NO.50, 13^TH CROSS, LAKSHMINARAYANAPURA, SRIRAMPURA, BENGALURU, R/O 107, RMP APARTMENT, 1^ST MAIN,1^ST CROSS, KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR, T DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU – 560 057.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

(BY SRI. PRABHUGOUD B. TUMBIGI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA, BENGALURU CITY DIVISION, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-01 REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶14

LAKSHMANAN AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:34280 CRL.P No. 13050 of 2024

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

S/O LATE ARUNACHALAM, R/AT NO.21, 5^TH CROSS, 5^TH MAIN, SWATHANTRAPALYA, SRIRAMPURAM, BENGALURU – 560 021.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. VENKATESH S. ARAVATTI, SPL. PP FOR R-1) (NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶21

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.C.NO.1513/2024 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1, ACB POLICE, BENGALURU CITY, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 7(A) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 (AMENDED 2018), PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE XXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE (P.C.ACT), AT BENGALURU,(CCH-24).

¶22

THIS PETITION IS BEING HEARD AND RESERVED ON 13.06.2025 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶24

CAV ORDER

¶25

In this petition, petitioner – sole accused seeks quashing of the impugned proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.1513/2024 pending against the petitioner for an alleged offence punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short ‘the P.C.Act’), pending on the file of XXIII Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge and Spl.Judge, Bangalore and for other reliefs.

¶26

3 -

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:34280 CRL.P No. 13050 of 2024

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for 1^st respondent – Lokayuktha. Though the notice of this petition has been served on the 2^nd respondent – complainant, he has chosen to remain absent and unrepresented.

¶30

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner was working as a Lineman in BESCOM, Srirampuram Division, Bangalore as on 16.12.2021 when the 2^nd respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner - accused before the 1^st respondent – Lokayuktha, who registered an FIR in Crime No.65/2021 for offences punishable under Section 7(a) of the P.C.Act against the petitioner. It is alleged that the petitioner demanded illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/- from the 2^nd respondent to show / do an official favour for the purpose of electricity connection and road cutting.

¶31

In pursuance of the aforesaid complaint, the 1^st respondent - Lokayuktha are alleged to have conducted trap proceedings and are alleged to have recovered Rs.10,000/- by way of tainted currency notes from the petitioner at about 5.30 p.m. on 16.12.2021. Thereafter, the 1^st respondent conducted investigation and filed the impugned charge sheet before the trial court which

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:34280 CRL.P No. 13050 of 2024

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

took cognizance of the offence vide order dated 23.08.2024 against the petitioner, who is before this Court by way of the present petition.

¶35

A perusal of the aforesaid order dated 23.08.2024 passed by the trial court taking cognizance will clearly indicate that the trial court has prima facie examined the material on record and has correctly and properly proceeded to take cognizance of the offence alleged against the petitioner by passing the aforesaid order, which is as hereunder:-

¶36

“ ORDERS

¶37

The Police Inspector of the Karnataka Lokayukta, Bengaluru Urban Division has submitted the charge sheet on 15.07.2024 against accused for an offence punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 (for short the “PC Act”).

¶38

2. Perusal of the record reveals that, initially the then Anti Corruption Bureau (for short the ‘ACB’) has got registered the FIR against accused on the strength of the complaint lodged by Sri Lakshmanan with the allegation that, the accused being the public servant in the capacity of Meter reader of BESCOM at Srirampura has received Rs.80,000/- on different dates from the informant Sri. Lakshmanan with an assurance to install the electricity meter to his house at Swathanthrapalya of Bangalore City. Again on 16.12.2021, the accused has demanded the illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/- from the informant to do an official favour for installation of electricity meter. The informant in turn got registered the crime against the accused at the ACB Police Station. On the same day, the ACB Police having performed the

¶39

5 -

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:34280 CRL.P No. 13050 of 2024

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

pre-trap formalities have laid the successful trap and arrested the accused while he was receiving the illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/from the complainant.

¶43

3. Subsequently, the accused was enlarged on bail by the order of this court. It is seen that, as a result of abolition of the ACB institution, the case file has been transferred to the Karnataka Lokayukta police who in turn, filed the charge sheet with its enclosures including the prosecution sanction order against the accused after completion of the investigation. The recitals of the charge sheet, FIR, pre-trap and trap panchanamas, chemical examination and FSL reports, statements of witnesses, and other documents including the prosecution sanction order issued by the competent authority under Section 19 of the PC Act primafacie indicates the existence of the case to proceed against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 7(a) of the PC Act. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶44

ORDER

¶45

Cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 7(a) of Te Prevention of Corruption Act is taken against the accused.

¶46

Office is directed to register the case in register No.III and issue summons to the accused returnable by 28.09.2024.”

¶47

A perusal of the aforesaid order passed by the trial court

¶48

will indicate that the same cannot be said to suffer from any illegality or infirmity nor can the same be said to be capricious or perverse warranting interference by this Court in the present petition.

¶49

As stated supra, the material on record comprising of the complaint, FIR, charge sheet material, enclosures, prosecution

¶50

6 -

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC:34280 CRL.P No. 13050 of 2024

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

sanction order, pre-trap panchanama, trap panchanama, chemical examination, voice recordings, FSL reports, statements of witnesses will prima facie indicate that in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, this is not a fit case to interfere with the impugned proceedings by this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or Section 482 Cr.P.C., since the various allegations as borne out from the material on record would necessarily have to be dealt with by the trial court. It is however necessary to state that liberty would have to be reserved in favour of the petitioner to seek discharge / file discharge application (if charges are not already framed as on today) and if such a request / application is made, the trial court shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that the present petition deserves to be disposed of without interfering with the impugned proceedings.

¶54

Accordingly, the petition is hereby disposed of without interfering with the impugned FIR, complaint, charge sheet and proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.1513/2024 pending before the trial court. Liberty is however reserved in favour of the petitioner to seek

¶55

7 -

¶56

NC: 2025:KHC:34280 CRL.P No. 13050 of 2024

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

discharge / file discharge application before the trial court, which shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the merits / demerits of the

¶59

rival contentions.

¶60

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶61

Srl.

Manjunathan M v. the State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjunathan M v. the State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K N Inayath Ulla Vs the State of Karnataka

R Vijay Vs the State of Karnataka

Suresha N L Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Ashwathanarayana C Vs the State of Karnataka by

Sunday Chukwudi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sunday Chukwudi Vs State of Karnatak by