‘Offence is demanding, accepting bribe’: Karnataka HC refuses to quash proceedings against Tiptur assistant prosecutor

Nagarajaiah then approached the Lokayukta police, following which the accused, including a typist, were caught in a trap as further payments were allegedly made.

The Karnataka High Court last month declined to quash proceedings in a bribery case against an assistant prosecutor working in a court in Tumakuru district’s Tiptur, observing that the law was not affected by whether or not the work for which the money was sought was carried out or not.

The order, passed on November 21 by a bench of Justice M I Arun, was made publicly available on Monday.

The case involves a complaint by Range Forest Officer R Nagarajaiah against Assistant Prosecutor Poornima G.

Nagarajaiah had been acquitted under criminal proceedings related to causing grievous hurt. On February 25, 2019, Poornima issued an opinion stating that it was a fit verdict for the government to appeal. Nagarajaiah was allegedly unaware that this opinion had been submitted.

Poornima then allegedly demanded a sum of Rs 10,000 from each person who had been acquitted in the aforementioned proceeding, including Nagarajaiah, to submit a report that the case was unfit for appeal. Accordingly, a sum of Rs 20,000 was allegedly paid to a third party.

Poornima’s counsel argued that she had never received the alleged amount and that the allegation of demand came only after she had already submitted an opinion against the forest officer. Nagarajaiah had influenced the authorities using his position and made a false complaint based on a vendetta, it was claimed. It was also argued that proceedings under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act could not be initiated for work already completed, which, in this case, would also be against the interest of the petitioner.

The opposing counsel argued that Nagarajaiah was unaware of the report already being completed, and that he was contacted solely because the accused wanted to earn money illegally. They further argued that under the law, it was immaterial whether the bribe for something to be done involved work which was already completed or not. The counsel argued that the relevant point would be the demand and the acceptance of the bribe.

“What is sought to be punished is obtaining or accepting or attempting to obtain the illegal gratification. The result is immaterial. The allegation in the instant case is that the petitioner hid from the second respondent the fact of submitting an opinion adverse to his interest and then tried to obtain a bribe…The offence in the instant case is demanding and accepting the bribe. The fact of legal opinion being given against the interest of the petitioner is immaterial. No doubt, the onus of proving the same lies upon the prosecution,” the court observed.

The bench noted that it was for the trial court to decide whether the accused was guilty or not, adding that it was not a fit case for the high court to exercise its jurisdiction. Dismissing the petition to quash the proceedings, the bench further added that none of the observations in its order would influence the trial court’s verdict.