Sri K v Rajesh Vs State of Karnataka

SRI K V RAJESH S/O. RAMAMURTHY AGED 43 YEARS R/AT 558, GURU KRUPA 9^TH B MAIN ROAD NEAR NEW TOWN PUBLIC SCHOOL Digitally signed by 1^ST STAGE, B SECTOR SREEDHARAN BANGALORE YELAHANKA NEW TOWN SUSHMA LAKSHMI BENGALURU 560 064 Location: High Court of Karnataka (BY SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR P., ADVOCATE)

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA POLICE STATION,

¶14

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:14695 CRL.P No. 3221 of 2026

¶15

HC-KAR

¶16

BENGALURU CITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MS BUILDING, DR BR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY SRI B LETHIF, SPL.P.P.)

¶19

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL WHO HAS BEEN ARRAYED AS ACCUSED IN CR.NO.05/2026 DTD 09.02.2026 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT/KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA PS, BENGALURU CITY, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SEC. 7(a) OF THE PC ACT, 1988, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT CASES AT BENGALURU CITY (CCH-24).

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶22

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:14695 CRL.P No. 3221 of 2026

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The present petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.05/2026 of respondent - Karnataka Lokayukta Police for the offences punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 pending on the file of the learned XXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act Cases at Bengaluru City (CCH-24). The petitioner is seeking for regular bail.

¶26

Brief facts of the case:

¶27

The case of the prosecution is that, the complainant was working as an Electric Contractor, and he filed an application on behalf of Mr.Deepak Prabhu for re-activation of RR No.HP3336-5HP and AEH6916-1KW concerning to the property bearing Khata No. 161 of Medahalli Village, Bidarahalli, Bangalore East, which was standing in the name of said Sri Deepak Prabhu.

¶28

It is alleged that on 30.01.2026, the petitioner has informed the Chief Engineer about the said issue, and it is

¶29

4 -

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:14695 CRL.P No. 3221 of 2026

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

alleged that the demand has been made by the present petitioner.

¶33

It is further alleged that on 04.02.2026, the complainant approached the AEE, E-11 Sub-Division, and thereafter, he had approached the present petitioner, who was working as Executive Engineer at Indiranagara Division, BESCOM, and enquired about the processing of the said application. On 05.02.2026, the Assistant Engineer recorded and prepared a field report and forwarded the same to the AEE for further process.

¶34

It is further alleged that the concerned AEE has forwarded the aforesaid reports along with instructions to change the name of the subscriber, to the Office of the Executive Engineer, Indiranagara Division. It is further alleged that the petitioner had demanded Rs.7,00,000/- to get the work done. The complainant disagreed with the said demand, thereafter, it has been reduced to Rs.3,00,000/-. As the complainant was not inclined to give such bribe, he had informed the jurisdictional Lokayuktha Police.

¶35

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:14695 CRL.P No. 3221 of 2026

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

On 09.02.2026, after recording the pre-trap

¶38

proceedings, a panchanama/mahazar was drawn. It is further alleged that the petitioner was caught red-handedly. Now, the petitioner is presently in judicial custody.

¶39

Heard Sri Prasanna Kumar P., learned counsel for

¶40

the petitioner and Sri Lathif B., learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for respondent - Lokayukta Police.

¶41

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence, and he has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact, there is no demand and acceptance of the alleged bribe/illegal gratification. In order to attract the ingredients of Section 7(a) of PC Act, demand and acceptance are sine-qua-non . However, in this case, the said demand is absent. The petitioner is a reputed person having a deep root in the society. The petitioner is aged about 43 years and he is a permanent resident of Yelahanka New Town, Bangalore.

¶42

It is further submitted that, the petitioner being a public servant would abide by the conditions to be imposed by

¶43

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:14695 CRL.P No. 3221 of 2026

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

this Court in event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶46

Per contra, learned Special Counsel for the respondent vehemently submitted that the investigation would indicate that the petitioner had demanded illegal gratification of Rs.3,00,000/-. The said amount has been recovered. The pendency of the work has also been proved. At this stage, it is not appropriate to grant bail as prayed for. Making such submissions, learned Special Counsel prays to reject the petition.

¶47

Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents available on record.

¶48

It is alleged in the complaint that the petitioner had demanded illegal gratification of Rs.7,00,000/-. Thereafter, on negotiation, it has been reduced to Rs.3,00,000/-. Though, it is alleged that the amount has been recovered at the instance of the petitioner, the fact remains that the said amount has been recovered from the car of the petitioner. Having

¶49

7 -

¶50

NC: 2026:KHC:14695 CRL.P No. 3221 of 2026

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

considered the facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner by imposing suitable conditions, which would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution.

¶53

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:-

¶54

ORDER

¶55

i) The petition is allowed .

¶56

ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.5/2026 of respondent/Karnataka Lokayukta Police for the offences punishable under Section 7(a) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, pending on the file of the learned XXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act Cases at Bengaluru City (CCH-24), on executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶57