B K Kishor Kumar vs. The State Of Karnataka

Facts

The petitioners, B.K. Kishore Kumar (Police Inspector) and B.H. Janardhan (Police Constable), both attached to Electronic City Police Station, Bengaluru, filed petitions under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking to quash FIR No. 35/2020 registered by the Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB). The FIR was registered for offences under Sections 7(a) and 13(1)(a) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The prosecution's case, based on a complaint by Vishesh Gupta, alleged that during the COVID-19 lockdown on April 11, 2020, the complainant was intercepted with 116 bottles of liquor. The Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) allegedly demanded Rs. 50 lakhs for releasing him, and subsequently, the Inspector (petitioner in Crl.P. 4791/2020) and Constable (petitioner in Crl.P. 5195/2020) were involved in demanding and receiving bribe amounts totaling Rs. 5 lakhs. The ACB took up the investigation, which is now under challenge.

Held

The Court held that the criminal proceedings against both petitioners, B.K. Kishore Kumar (Accused No. 1) and B.H. Janardhan (Accused No. 2), were an abuse of the process of law and liable to be quashed. Regarding Accused No. 1, the Court noted the absence of direct allegations of bribe demand in the initial complaint and the preliminary inquiry report clearing him. It was also highlighted that Accused No. 1 was allegedly on leave during the incident, and despite abundant material against the ACP, the ACB did not register a case against him or seek prosecution permission. The Court found it surprising that prosecution permission was sought only against Accused No. 1, with no reasons provided for not prosecuting the ACP and Accused No. 2. The Court also noted that the petitioners produced documents showing they were on leave. For both petitioners, the Court relied on the principle that if an inquiry report exonerates an accused on merits, continuing criminal prosecution on the same facts would be an abuse of process, citing the Supreme Court's decision in P.S. Rajya and Ashoo Surendranath Tewari. The Court found no case made out against the petitioners for investigation, especially since the complainant himself was facing trial for the alleged incident. Therefore, the FIR was quashed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, B.K. Kishore Kumar (Accused No. 1), are an abuse of the process of law, considering the lack of direct allegations of bribe demand against him in the initial complaint and subsequent departmental inquiries, and the fact that he was allegedly on sick leave during the incident? (Section 482 Cr.P.C., Sections 7 & 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988). 2. Whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, B.H. Janardhan (Accused No. 2), are an abuse of the process of law, given that departmental inquiries reportedly found no material against him? (Section 482 Cr.P.C., Sections 7 & 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners argued that the initial complaint to the DCP did not implicate Accused No. 1, and a preliminary inquiry report also cleared him. They contended that Accused No. 1 was on sick leave and not present at the police station. They further argued that the second complaint, filed after a month, falsely implicated Accused No. 1, and he merely handed over a mobile phone as instructed by the ACP without demanding or accepting any bribe. For Accused No. 2, it was argued that departmental inquiries found him not guilty, making further criminal investigation an abuse of process. They relied on P.S. Rajya vs. State of Bihar. Revenue's Arguments: The ACB contended that the ingredients of the offences under Sections 7 and 13 of the P.C. Act were clearly attracted as the petitioners and the ACP allegedly demanded and received bribe money, necessitating further investigation.