Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/4805/2026 of SAVITHA H N Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 8 April 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:19577 CRL.P No. 4805 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 4875 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4805 OF 2026 (439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS)) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4875 OF 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4805 OF 2026
(439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS))
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4875 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
SAVITHA H N
D/O NARASIMHANAYAKA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT ASHOKA NAGARA
WARD-1 VIJAYAPURA,
BENGALURU RURAL – 562 135
PRESENTLY R/AT NO.2,
GOVT. DOCTORS QUARTERS,
SIRA GOVT. HOSPITAL
PREMISES, SIRA – 572 137
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K B K SWAMY., ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY LOKAYUKTA POLICE, TUMKUR
Digitally
signed by
PAVITHRA
N
Location:
High
Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
REPRESENTED BY
SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU – 560 001
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K. PRASANNA SHETTY., SPL.PP)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS)
BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO
ENLARGE
HER
ON
BAIL
IN
CONNECTION
WITH
CRIME.NO.2/2026
REGISTERED
BY
THE
KARNATAKA
LOKAYUKTHA
POLICE,
TUMAKURU,
FOR
THE
OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 7(A) OF PREVENTION OF
CORRUPTION ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE VII
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE
AT TUMAKURU.
IN CRL.P No.4875/2026
BETWEEN:
MANOJ E
S/O ESHWARAIAH.D,
R/AT HOSAHALLI VILLAGE,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
HULIKUNTE HOBLI,
YEDALADAKU POST,
SIRA TALUK,
HC-KAR
TUMAKURU – 572 135.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. GADEKAR NAGARAJ BABU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY LOKAYUKTA POLICE, TUMKUR
REPRESENTED BY
SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU – 560 001.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K. PRASANNA SHETTY., SPL.PP)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS)
BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO
ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN CONNECTION WITH CR.NO.2/2026
REGISTERED BY THE KARNATAKA LOLAYUKTHA POLICE, TUMAKURU, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 7(a) OF PREVENTION
OF CORRUPTION ACT, AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE
HON’BLE VII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND
SPECIAL JUDGE, AT TUMAKURU.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
HC-KAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.1 and 2 are before this Court seeking regular bail in Crime No.02/2026 of respondent-police for the offence under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amendment Act, 2018).
Brief facts of the case:
2. The case of the prosecution is that Smt.Mangalamma aged about 60 years was suffering from vision impairment in her left eye and she was required to undergo surgery. Owing to the financial constraints, the complainant approached Tumkuru District Government Hospital on 21.02.2026 and the complainant was advised to approach the petitioner. The complainant had approached the petitioner along with his mother. The petitioner after conducting examination of his mother, opined that his mother required surgery. It is further stated that to fix suitable and good lens, Rs.6,000/- was to be paid. However, the complainant was not willing to pay the said amount. Hence, he lodged a complaint before the respondent-Police. A pre-trap panchanama was
HC-KAR
conducted and later, the complainant along with a shadow witness went to the spot and he was waiting to meet the petitioner/accused No.1. However, accused No.2 called the name of his mother. Then the complainant approached the accused No.2 and it is alleged that amount of Rs.6,000/- has been paid as illegal gratification to accused No.2. The said amount has been recovered from accused No.2 and the case has been registered against both accused Nos.1 and 2. The investigation is under progress.
3. Heard Sri.K.B.K.Swamy, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 in Crl.P.No.4805/2026 and Sri.Gadekar Nagaraj Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.2 in Crl.P.No.4875/2026 and Sri.K.Prasanna Shetty, learned Special PP for the respondent-State.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the respective petitioners that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offences. In fact, the complainant with a malafide intention has lodged a false complaint to implicate the petitioners in a baseless and false case.
HC-KAR
5. It is further submitted that the petitioners with a bonafide intention and due to the request made by the complainant, received an amount of Rs.6,000/- for the purpose of implanting the lens to the eye of the mother of the complainant. There is no demand nor acceptance of illegal gratification as alleged in the complaint.
6. It is further submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case with a malafide intention. The petitioner/accused No.1 is a reputed Doctor and she is working for the welfare of the poor people. The petitioner No.2/accused No.2 is also working as Multi Task Assistant. In fact, the complainant himself thrusted the amount to accused No.2 and asked him to bring good quality lens. Later, he had informed the Lokayukta Police alleging that the petitioners have demanded illegal gratification to purchase the lens, which is false and baseless. Therefore, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. They will abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court in the event of their release on bail. Therefore, they may be enlarged on bail.
HC-KAR
Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners prays to allow the petitions.
7. Per contra, learned Special Counsel for respondent- State vehemently submitted that the petitioners being Government Officials had demanded an illegal gratification of Rs.6,000/- on the pretext of purchasing lens for the cataract surgery to be conducted on the mother of the complainant. However, the amount ought not to have been demanded as the said lens was available in the hospital on free of cost. Therefore, the respondent-Police have rightly registered a case and conducting the investigation. The investigation is under progress. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant any relief as prayed for. Making such submissions, learned HCGP prays to reject the petition.
8. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the complaint. It appears that complainant was working as an Auto Driver and his mother was suffering from eyesight problem. She was taken to Narayana Hospital, Bengaluru, there she has been identified and diagnosed that she needs cataract surgery. Therefore, the
HC-KAR
complainant was advised to admit his mother. However, the complainant being unable to bear the expenditure to be incurred for the purpose of surgery. Hence, he opted to approach the Government Hospital. Accordingly, he approached the petitioner/accused No.1 and requested her to conduct surgery to his mother.
9. On going through the documents available on records, it appears that accused No.1/petitioner demanded Rs.6,000/- for the purpose of providing good and suitable lens stating that such lens was not available in the hospital. However, the complainant had approached the respondent/Police. Later, the amount was recovered from accused No.2, who is working as Multi Task Staff in the hospital.
10. Be that as it may, on going through the documents available on record, it appears that the alleged demand of Rs.6,000/- has not been made as illegal gratification and there is ambiguity in respect of the said demand. Having considered the said ambiguity, it is appropriate to grant the relief as prayed for in these petitions.
HC-KAR
11. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The petitions are allowed.
(ii) The petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 are ordered to be enlarged on bail in No.02/2026 of respondent-police for the offence under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amendment Act, 2018), on executing their personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with one surety each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
(iii) The petitioners shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the proceedings of the Court.
(iv) The petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court on all hearing dates without fail.
HC-KAR
(v) The petitioners shall not indulge in any criminal cases till disposal of the case.
(vi) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation till filing of final report.
In case, the petitioners violate any of the bail conditions as stated above, liberty is reserved to the prosecution to file necessary application for cancellation of bail.
Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE
NR/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 78