Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Complaint Against Police Inspector Booked For Not Depositing Seized Amount With State Treasury

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a complaint lodged under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, against a police inspector who did not deposit with the state treasury the seized money which was received while investigating a cheating case.

A Single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Shankar Naik G K and said “In the light of seriously disputed maze of facts which prima facie depict a crime thriller, it would amaze this Court for entertaining the subject petition, as it does require investigation in the least.

The petitioner was serving as a Police Inspector in the Byatarayanapura police station, when a cheating case came to be registered against one Santhosh Kumar. During investigation Rs 72 lakh, was seized. However, when the magistrate court directed the Byatarayanapura Police to deliver the seized amount to the custody of the officials of the Income-Tax Department, it failed.

Subsequently, a preliminary inquiry was ordered wherein the petitioner was given a clean chit. Later, a different ACP registered a crime against the petitioner alleging that he had kept the entire Rs 72 lakhs with him. Following which he approached the court seeking quashing.

Petitioner argued there is no criminal misconduct on his part and he has handed over charge of the police station on his transfer to the incumbent with all necessary documents including PF that was drawn of the amount. It was submitted merely because notes of the denomination are different than that was seized earlier, it cannot become a crime against the petitioner.

The prosecution opposed the plea saying several reminders were sent to the petitioner to deposit the amount but he did not do so and only when he came to know that the Income Tax Department has filed an application under Sections 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C. claiming the amount as belonging to it, he came to the Police Station, kept the money after about 4 months of seizure. It was said the matter requires investigation, the offences would all crystallise only after conduct of investigation and filing of a final report.

The bench on going through the records noticed that the complainant clearly narrated that the petitioner had demanded a bribe to release Rs 72 lakhs. The bribe amount that he demanded was Rs 20 lakhs. It said,

“Two factors would emerge – one, the petitioner keeping the amount with him without depositing it to the Treasury and the other, tampering with PF by changing the denomination of notes. These factors prima facie would meet the ingredients of the crime that is alleged against the petitioner. Therefore, the matter would require investigation, in the least, as the factors are glaring and clear insofar as ingredients of offences are concerned.”

Accordingly it dismissed the petition.

Appearance: Advocate P Prasanna Kumar for Petitioner.

SPP B A Belliappa a/w HCGP Thejest P for Respondent

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 369

Case Title: Shankar Naik G K AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.26231 OF 2023

Click Here To Read/Download Order