Karnataka High Court
State Of Karnataka By Lokayukta Police vs R Nagaraj S/O Ramakrishnappa on 2 September, 2008
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao
Bench: K.Sreedhar Rao
mass? was Juncmmrr n*r.3<>.1.o4 masnn 312-._ C . C .No . woo -- ACQUITTING _.....'_i'HE' % ~ R.EsP€:rNnm~:r'r/ACCUSEE FOR THE OFEE'NCfESj* ~- wuzss. '7, 13(1)' (:11 RN SEC.1Z3_[,2_'}...V'--.()E'4_ zvnmrmrxau or conmmrmm A£Z1'~,.._4 19BB4.'*--I,'.!:H"E._j_ ayymnmwwsrnrs ylu-rm mm 'E-_HE_<3E.1':i$I«I_._ 5 M3,? 31!} 523'}? JLSIDE. .
This aypaal aaming an f#r,hafiri@§ this .day. the Court delivaxed"th$;fe;1owinqi Thug on that the acausad =fifi%$in¢ Qaé»%a5 secretary of Kaspet Gpama' Fén§hfiy§i demanded illegal gxat.ifi::e:t.{£:1zz * . 400/3 fmm the ..... 4:0 effect khata change. P}Wg§ wig fi§t" willing t¢ give bribe. : x,theréf5£eg'3hé approached the Lekayukta .. '_T;~_--«.;_:§ai's.3._ic:«ar,' arranged the trap. '" _5'§}W.2 is a ahadow witneas. The V f fiaifi;@d mnnay was smeared with h V"'--v.A>V§k§§ific:pthalin powdex, given ta: P.9!'.4 with specific inatxugtiona that the amount to u_1\Iu...slI...O'hfl\II.ml1I sum islrarslfi Iiaihgfis be paid to the accuawd only an P.W.4, accordingly along with P.W..2 and mats accuaed. on demand Z T paymant: or n.a..4oox--.. qafe signal to the LO. -.__who'"A.v_""c:gmfé.:V'"u" V apprahanded the a,c:<'.:1.'u-mt:1, [_ teat and also rac¢§*.§reci_ iron the aacmaed' »~ . . ..
it im aacuaed that A333 is not a bribe mxfiagy', hrreara of houae tax. Thu found fmm the
---------- that when he met the iétiffggectinq khata change, he was "*~~='to1d"'fit invalvea expenses or
-'..v. P.W.5 does not .-say that tim deraanded any bribe for effecting change. The reccrda are also to ahxnm-r that there were arraara <3-f house tax of 11.5.41?/* tczmard.-5 the QE/ fax any interference. Acct:-rdingly appeal is dismissed.
Psg*