Sri. Harish L.v., Vs State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:54425 CRL.P No. 16323 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 16361 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 16323 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS))

¶7

C/W

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 16361 OF 2025

¶9

IN CRL.P No. 16323/2025

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SRI. HARISH L.V. S/O VIRUPAKSHAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS OUTSOURCE EMPLOYEE COMPUTER OPERATOR P.R.E.D. DEPARTMENT TIPTUR TOWN. R/A LINGADAHALLI KASABA HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 201.

¶13

…PETITIONER

¶14

(BY SRI GOPALA, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA POLICE TUMKUR.

¶17

REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

¶18

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:54425 CRL.P No. 16323 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 16361 of 2025

HC-KAR

BENGALURU – 560 001.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI MANISH R, ADVOCATE SRI B B PATEL, ADVOCATE)

¶23

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 Cr.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN CR.No.10/2025 REGISTERED BY THE LOKAYUKTA P.S., TUMAKURU AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND TWO OTHERS BEFORE THE VII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, AT TUMAKURU, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 7(A) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT (AMENDED ACT-2018).

¶24

IN CRL.P No. 16361/2025

¶25

BETWEEN:

¶26

SRI.SUHAS P

¶27

S/O PANCHAKSHARAIAH

¶28

AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS ASSISTANT ENGINEER, P.R.E.D. DEPARTMENT, TIPTUR TOWN R/AT VIDYANAGAR, 8^TH CROSS TIPTUR TOWN

¶29

TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 201.

¶30

...PETITIONER

¶31

(BY SRI. GOPALA, ADVOCATE)

¶32

AND:

¶33

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶34

REP. BY LOKAYUKTA POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TUMKUR-572 201.

¶35

...RESPONDENT

¶36

(BY SRI MANISH R, ADVOCATE SRI B B PATEL, ADVOCATE)

¶37

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:54425 CRL.P No. 16323 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 16361 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 Cr.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN CR.No.10/2025 REGISTERED BY THE LOKAYUKTHA POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND TWO OTHERS FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 7(a) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION AT (AMENDED ACT 2018) ON THE FILE OF 7^TH ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT TUMAKURU.

¶40

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

¶41

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶42

ORAL ORDER

¶43

Crl.P.No.16323/2025 is filed by accused No.3 and

¶44

Crl.P.16361/2025 is filed by accused No.2.

¶45

Both these petitions are filed under Section 483 of

¶46

BNSS praying to grant bail in Cr.No.10/2025 of Tumkur Lokayukta Police Station, registered for offence under

¶47

Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

¶48

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent.

¶49

Learned counsel for petitioners would contend that in the trap, accused No.1 was found having received the

¶50

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:54425 CRL.P No. 16323 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 16361 of 2025

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

bait amount and trap mahazar has been drawn. Accused

¶53

No.1 has been granted bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.16216/2025 by order dated 09.12.2025. The allegation against accused No.2 is that he also demanded bribe from the complainant and the allegation against accused No.3 is that he had received Rs.13,000/- by Phonepe payment made by the complainant on behalf of accused No.2 and he demanded Rs.2,000/- for himself. The petitioners are similarly placed to that of accused No.1 who has already been granted bail. Therefore, they are entitled for grant of bail on the ground of parity. With these, he prayed to allow the petitions.

¶54

Per contra , learned counsel for respondent would contend that petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 have demanded bribe from the complainant. The conversation has been recorded by the complainant. The said conversation has been reduced into writing in the pre-trial mahazar. The investigation is in progress. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.

¶55

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:54425 CRL.P No. 16323 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 16361 of 2025

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has perused the FIR, complaint, remand application and other remedies placed on record.

¶58

This Court while granting bail to Accused No.1 has observed as under:

¶59

“ 6. The complainant is a contractor and he has undertaken contract work of repair of the two schools. As per averments of the complaint, complainant has completed the said works on 10.11.2025 and submitted the bills. As per averments of the complaint, the petitioner has demanded bribe at the rate of 3% of the bill amount and accused No.2 demanded bribe at the rate of 2% of the bill amount and apart from that the petitioner has demanded Rs.15,000/- to be paid to MLA. Pretrap mahazar has been prepared and it contains conversation between the complainant and the accused persons. In the trap, the petitioner is found to have received the amount of Rs.34,500/- from the complainant. The petitioner has given his statement in writing. The trap mahazar has been laid. The trap mahazar also indicates the seizure of the documents. In trap cases, major portion of the investigation will be over on the date of the trap, except receipt of the FSL report. The offence alleged against the petitioner

¶60

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:54425 CRL.P No. 16323 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 16361 of 2025

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

is not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioner is ready to cooperate with the Investigating Officer in investigation. The petitioner, who is working as Assistant Executive Engineer, can be secured easily for investigation and trial. Considering the above aspects, the petitioner has made out case for grant of bail with conditions.”

¶63

The allegation against accused No.1 who has been granted bail is that he demanded bribe at the rate of 3% of the bill amount from the complainant and he was trapped at the time of receiving Rs.34,500/- from the complainant. Accused No.2 is stated to have demanded bribe at the rate of 2% of the bill amount and he has received Rs.13,000/- through accused No.3. Complainant has made payment through Phonepe account of accused No.3. The allegation against accused No.3 is that he separately demanded Rs.2,000/- from the complainant.

¶64