Karnataka High Court Quashes Corruption Case Against Driver Who Kept Bribe Bag In Car On BESCOM Manager's Instructions

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the corruption case registered against a driver attached to the Chief General Manager of BESCOM, for merely keeping a bag containing bribe in the Manager's car on his instruction.

Noting that the demand and acceptance of bribe were made by the Manager who was booked as the first accused, Justice M Nagaprasanna held it is unfair to prosecute the "humble contract employee" who was just 40 days into service and was merely following instructions.

"Driver, is caught in the web of crime. Even if the incident is taken as true, it would not amount to an offence under Section 7(a) of the Act,” remarked the bench.

A trap was laid after an Electrical Contractor complained to the Lokayukta that the BESCOM manager had demanded a graft of 10 lakhs for conversion of electric supply from commercial tariff to industrial tariff.

As per the driver, he was asked to come to the office and was made to sit outside the cabin for some time. Thereafter, he was called inside by the Manager and instructed to keep the bag in the car boot. When he was keeping the bag in the car, the Lokayukta sleuths conducted a trap.

The driver thus approached the High Court, seeking to quash the case against him. Petitioner contended he was not aware of what was happening in any quarter of the office, as he was a new joinee. Moreover, he had neither demanded nor accepted any bribe amount on behalf of the Manager.

Prosecution opposed the plea stating that any person accepting a bribe on behalf of a public servant would also become punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The High Court however referred to the complaint and said, “complaint nowhere refers to the petitioner/accused No.2. Not a word is found against accused No.2. It is entirely dedicated to accused No.1. In the trap panchanama again there is no reference to the name of the petitioner.”

Following which it said “The driver who had admittedly joined a month ago in the office of accused No.1 on contract basis is dragged into the web of crime on the circumstances generated by accused No.1. The entire recording is against accused No.1 who has clearly demanded and accepted the bribe. Nothing beyond what is noted in the recording would be necessary to pin down accused No.1.”

As such, it allowed the pla and quashed the case against the Petitioner-driver.

Appearance: Advocate Prashanth S for Petitioner; SPP B.B Patil For R-1.

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 258

Case Title: Murali Krishna R AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.204 OF 2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order