Sri Dr S Ramanuja Vs the State of Karnataka

SRI DR S RAMANUJA S/O SANJEEVAIAH P AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS COMMERCIAL TAX JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS-6) DGSTO-06 SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE No.89, 5^TH CROSS, VYSYA BANK COLONY SHANTHINIKETHAN LAYOUT ARAKERE BANNERUGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE – 560 076. R/AT No.319, SRIRAMA NILAYA 6^TH MAIN ROAD, ITI LAYOUT MALLATHALLI BANGALORE NORTH BANGALORE -560 056. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHRIDHAR NARAYAN HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE-1 KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA BANGALORE URBAN DIVISION, BANGALORE-560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI B LETHIF, SPECIAL PROSECUTOR V/O DTD. 24.09.2025)

¶10

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:39898 CRL.P No. 13567 of 2025

¶11

HC-KAR

¶12

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE ACCUSED/ PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.No.48/2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT LOKAYUKTA POLICE AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 7(a) OF THE P.C ACT 1988 FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT WHICH IS REJECTED BY THE XXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE CUM SPL.JUDGE (P.C.ACT) BENGALURU AND ETC.,

¶13

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶14

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶15

ORAL ORDER

¶16

This petition is filed by the sole accused under

¶17

Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking grant of bail in crime No. 48/2025 of Lokayukta Police, Bengaluru, registered for

¶18

offence punishable under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the P.C. Act).

¶19

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Spl.P.P. for the respondent.

¶20

Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that the offence alleged against the petitioner under Section 7(a) of the P.C. Act is not punishable either with

¶21

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:39898 CRL.P No. 13567 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

death or imprisonment for life. Trap had been laid on 10.09.2025 and on the same day, the petitioner has been arrested and since then he is in judicial custody. As major portion of the investigation is completed, the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation. He placed reliance on the decision of a coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Manohar Urs S.K. and another Vs. State of Karnataka by Lokayuktha Police Station, Mandya, Crl.P. No. 2853/2025 disposed of on 12.03.2025 . He submits that the petitioner is a public servant and his presence can be secured easily. On these grounds he prayed to allow the petition.

¶24

Per contra, learned Spl.P.P. would contend that in order to dispose of the appeal filed by the complainant, the petitioner who was the appellate authority demanded bribe and conversation has been recorded by the complainant. Trap laid has been successful and there is demand and acceptance of bribe at the time of trap. The petitioner had kept the draft order ready in the appeal and

¶25

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:39898 CRL.P No. 13567 of 2025

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

he was waiting for receipt of bribe amount and the same

¶28

indicates that the work of the complainant was pending with the petitioner. There is a prima facie case against the petitioner for offence alleged against him. If bail is granted

¶29

to the petitioner at this stage, as investigation is still in progress, there are chances of he tampering the prosecution witnesses.

¶30

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court has perused the FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

¶31

In the complaint there is an allegation that in order to help the complainant in the appeal filed by him regarding tax due, the petitioner who was a Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax Department had demanded bribe. Trap had been laid and there is recovery of bait amount. Trap mahazar has also been drawn. In a

¶32

trap case major portion of the investigation would be completed on the day of trap itself. Since last one month petitioner is in judicial custody and only report from FSL is

¶33

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:39898 CRL.P No. 13567 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

awaited. Major portion of investigation in the case is completed. The petitioner is not having any criminal antecedents. Maximum punishment for the alleged offence is imprisonment for a period of 7 years. Considering the above aspect, the petitioner has made out case for grant of bail with conditions.

¶36