Smt Suma K vs The State By Lokayuktha Police
2023 Latest Caselaw 7675 Kant

                                        -1-
                                                      NC: 2023:KHC:40601
                                                 WP No. 9388 of 2020




                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                   DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

                                     BEFORE
                       THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
                    WRIT PETITION NO.9388 OF 2020 (GM-RES)

            BETWEEN:

            1.    SMT. SUMA K.
                  W/O. DEVARAJAIAH H.
                  AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
                  WORKING AS SENIOR SUB-REGISTRAR
                  OFFICE OF THE SUB-REGISTRAR
                  BIDARAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 049.
                                                           ...PETITIONER
            (BY SRI SATISH K., ADVOCATE)

            AND:

            1.    THE STATE
                  BY LOKAYUKTHA POLICE
                  REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY
                  SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
Digitally         M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.
signed by
SUMA
Location:                                                 ...RESPONDENT
HIGH        (BY SRI PRAKASH R.G., ADVOCATE FOR
COURT OF
KARNATAKA      SRI B.B. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

                 THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
            CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C
            PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE
            IMPUGNED FIRST INFORMATION REPORT REGISTERED BY THE
            RESPONDENT-POLICE IN CRIME NO.07/2020 (ANNEXURE-A)
            AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT THERETO,
            INSOFAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, IN THE
            INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
                               -2-
                                          NC: 2023:KHC:40601
                                        WP No. 9388 of 2020




         THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                           ORDER

1. Petitioner has challenged the registration of first

information report in Crime No.7/2020 against him for the

offences punishable under Sections 7(a) and 7A of the

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the P.C.

Act').

2. On a complaint dated 24.07.2020 lodged by the

Inspector of Police attached to the Anti Corruption Bureau

to the Superintendent of Police, a case in Crime No.7/2020

was registered for the offences punishable under Sections

7(a) and 7A of the P.C. Act. The substance of the

complaint was that he had received credible information

from the public that the officers working at the Sub-

Registrar, Bidarahalli were collecting money to perform

official duties through their agents such as, document

writers and stamp vendors etc. The Deputy

Superintendent of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau had

NC: 2023:KHC:40601 WP No. 9388 of 2020

directed a discreet enquiry to be held and a report to be

submitted to him. Accordingly, a discreet enquiry was

held and it was found that many officers in the office of

the Sub-Registrar, Bidarahalli were collecting money

through their agents. He also placed on record the agents

who were helping in the collection of the illegal

gratification. Based on this, the office of the Sub-

Registrar, Bidarahalli was raided on 29.07.2020 and it was

found that the petitioner was in possession of a sum of

Rs.100/- which was entered in the personal cash register

maintained at the office. It was also found that the other

officials were in possession of small amounts of cash while

those who possessed sufficient cash were all persons who

had come to the office for registration of documents.

Therefore, being aggrieved by the registration of Crime

No.7/2020 against the petitioner for the offences

punishable under Sections 7(a) and 7A of the P.C. Act, this

petition is filed.

NC: 2023:KHC:40601 WP No. 9388 of 2020

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner did not demand or accept any illegal gratification

from any person to perform or forbear from performing

any public duty, and therefore, an offence under Sections

7(a) and 7A of the P.C. Act was not committed. Likewise,

he contended that the petitioner did not demand any

undue advantage from any person, and therefore, an

offence under Sections 7(a) and 7A of the P.C. Act was not

committed. He has relied upon the judgment of a

Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.200473/2023

c/w 200524/2023 (DD 24.07.2023) and contended that in

similar circumstances, this Court has held that an offence

under Sections 7(a) and 7A of the P.C. Act is not

committed.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other

hand, submitted that the premises was searched based on

credible information. He submitted that there was no

incriminating material seized from the petitioner on the

date of the raid. He did not dispute the fact that there

NC: 2023:KHC:40601 WP No. 9388 of 2020

was no demand or acceptance by the petitioner of any

illegal gratification to perform or forbear from performing

any official act.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the

learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel

for the respondent.

6. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the

petitioner, there was no allegation against the petitioner of

demanding or accepting any illegal gratification from any

person to do any official favour or forbear from doing any

official act. It is unfortunate that though the complaint

was registered by the Inspector of Police, Anti Corruption

Bureau on 24.07.2020, the respondent remained quiet till

29.07.2020 and after giving a long rope, raided the

premises of the Sub-Registrar. The raid did not yield any

incriminating material to prosecute the petitioner. In that

view of the matter, continuation of investigation against

the petitioner is unwarranted as no offence under Sections

NC: 2023:KHC:40601 WP No. 9388 of 2020

7(a) and 7A of the P.C. Act was made out. Therefore, the

petitioner is entitled to succeed.

7. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The

registration of FIR in Crime No.7/2020 against the

petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 7(a)

and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is

quashed.

8. Before parting with the case, it is necessary to

mention that the Inspector of Police had lodged a

complaint on 24.07.2020 stating therein that a preliminary

enquiry was conducted by visiting the office of the

Sub-Registrar and it was found that the officials there

were demanding illegal gratification from the persons

visiting the office. He also indicated the names of agents

used by the office of the Sub-Registrar for collection of

such illegal gratification. Shockingly, no steps were taken

on the same day to raid the premises of the Sub-Registrar.

But, it was done on 29.07.2020. If only the office of the

Sub-Registrar was raided on the same day i.e. on

NC: 2023:KHC:40601 WP No. 9388 of 2020

24.07.2020, situation would have been otherwise. In that

view of the matter, the respondent is directed to keep the

concerned Deputy Superintendent of Police

Mr. Gopal D.Jogi present before this Court.

9. Learned High Court Government Pleader is directed to

secure information as to whether the Deputy

Superintendent of Police, Mr. Gopal D.Jogi is still in service

and if yes, the place where he is working. Learned High

Court Government Pleader shall also keep him present

before the Court on 23.11.2023.

Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed off.

Sd/-

JUDGE

hkh.