{"id":230577,"date":"2010-09-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010"},"modified":"2016-05-24T12:44:31","modified_gmt":"2016-05-24T07:14:31","slug":"state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: L.Narayana Swamy<\/div>\n
_ V Baga1,1\u00a7Ci,. \n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA\nCIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD _\n\nDATED THIS THE 23TH DAY or   ~\nBEFORE J  \" \"V  \nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE  \n\nCRLIMINAL AI=PEA'L._I\u00a7:o.      u\nCmMINAL'.%II%PEA:jL x2003 H V\n\nIn Criminal Appeal No.IV83s\"\/C2003  \n\nBetween;\n\nState of K\u00e9rrI1aiaka._ \"   .\nThrough th\u00e9\"P01ir:C I\"n_sps3c'tQ1*_,=\nLokayukia P01i'C.ef:\u00bb. i':,~y':{h'c- smc reap;\n\nfor the State praying that this H0r1'bI\u00e9i\u00abVCo--1__1rt n1a'y._be..pie\u00e91$'edv to,\nenhance the sentence passed.'_ by   Bagalkg), in \nSpI.C.No.20\/O1 dt.17.7.20.0'3,_ ' eoiivicting  t the\"\n\nrespondent\/ accused for the 0I\"fenee.._P,'U\/S.7-and \"U\/S5. 1.3 [1)[d)\nr\/W. Sec.13(2) of the Prevention----o\u20ac \"Coi*1u_,1ptioIi 'Ac:t,v\"1988 and\nsentencing him to unde1\u00b0go\"~R.1..'I\"or.  p_C:r.io'c1 of six months and\nto pay a fine of'<'1,000\/-- 1.17.,'o\u00a3"--p_2{3r1%.1ents.Ioftirne to undergo S.1.\nfor one month for the offence 13\/ U\/S17.' "o.f_"the Prevention of\nCorruption Act a1'a_<1"fui'the17sveiltencing hirn..jfo" undergo R1. for a\nperiod of one yea1':;n5_d to._p2';y~i"inei ol'*?2,QQiO\/-- LD. of payment\nof fine to und.eI'go S,_1--;_ i'c31f'two_m__o11;ths for the offence P\/U\/S.\n13(1)(d] r\/WI Se.e';r13[2'}-- .();{.""--:PIfE:V{?1T1ttiOL1 'of Corruption Act, the\nsubst.anti\\(e_Vsenteriees shgii  conctnrently.\n\nIn Criminal-.Ap3Vi\u00e9\u00e9zi;_1\\4T:6i.13O\u00a7'}'.2'Ob3\nBetween: V\n\noesuagaj Abdu1Vah.gth Shaikh.\n\n  V'A.gedv-Vaborgt 52 years, ' " **** " '\n7, Gee; 'Revezme. inspector,\n'Rel: abilistta-tion "C_ente1',\n\n .   \n<\/pre>\n
R\/o.Eaiste1’I1′ ;:’\\.”1_’_:=~.:\u00a71,
\nAppa1*'<–.Lanjd; -.\n<\/p>\n
 tiouse N..o.1.:_785, Gulbarga.  Appellant<\/p>\n
* V.    Patii. Advocate)<\/p>\n
– \u00abAnti H<\/p>\n
” Stat,e of Ke1rI1z1t’.z11{a.  Respondent<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
{By Srt. M.B.G1,1nc\u00a3awade, Advocate for Lokayukta}-* <\/p>\n
This C1’1.Ais filed u\/s. 374(2) e;f,;>.c. by”t.n”eia\u00bbdifoea’t.e IbuI’u <\/p>\n
the appellant\/ s against the judg.me:1t d’t;’1.7\ufb01.3?g.2GO_3″passed by
\nthe S.J. Bagalkot in Spl.Case NO’..28\/”2001,”–..(?().1’1ViCU1?I’g_ the<\/p>\n
apellant\/accused for the offence P\/WU\/S~,_ 7 aim, U.\/s.13{i-.){gd’)~_u
\n1’\/w. Sec.13 (2) of P.C. Aet..\u00bbi’1.9__88 an.dV’sent-eevneging him to ;
\nundergo R}. for a period of six ‘monthsV__arid_ to pay””iine of ‘<\/p>\n
31,000\/~ LI). of payment of \ufb01ne, to.._undergo”S,_1\u00a7 for one month
\nfor the offence P\/ U\/ S. 7,.of P.C,—Act’:aIid_ furthierv–.se.ntenced to
\nundergo RE. for a pe1’iod’of’o1ie year an_d\u00bbto’vpay fine of i’2,O0O\/W
\nID. of payment of fine toU;ndei’go’;*\u00bbS=.I. “fa1′;two months for the
\noffence P\/U”\/S.13[1)[d) 1-\/w.._ sec-j.1s'{2)   P.C. Act t.he
\nsubstantive se11ten’ee__to Ivan”eoncL11’rentiy; \u00ab. <\/p>\n
These afI’\u20ac’ mi; vforhearing this day, the<\/p>\n
court made the fe.1’ioWing:\n<\/p>\n
 >gg;.};t\u00a7;I;G1~J1Is:NT<\/p>\n
Theifearte vtvtvo  against the order passed<\/p>\n
 in Sgpgeeial Case..V_VVN’o.2:8\/2001 by the Sessions Judge.<\/p>\n
  the appeal filed before this Court by the<\/p>\n
Lo}<aytt:kttia"_v\u00bbPogliee for enhaneeinent. of punishment and<\/p>\n
the  \ufb02ied by the accused is for setting aside the<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
2. The pr0secut.i0n submitted    the<\/p>\n
punishment awarded by the Sessions  isA_fn40td’ii1_& <\/p>\n
eonsonance with the gravity gof _OffeI’1*i:e’I <\/p>\n
submitted to enhance the esame and~ t11es.vaceVi1sed:’; liiast\ufb01<\/p>\n
submitted that the prosectitiiotti’   itself
\nbeyond reasonable   suffers
\nand liable to be set aside,_    d if  if 9<\/p>\n
3-   if    have submitted by
\nelaailenging’   “S1;ecia1 Case No.28\/2001
\npassed  the  Bagalkot, heard both the<\/p>\n
partiesand pa.ssed this_ eeinmon order.<\/p>\n
 ‘sis,  Vvfacts”CAf,_the are as follows:<\/p>\n
 ‘  The_V4e0tni5la_int has been lodged by PW. 10 who is the<\/p>\n
br<5t.,11e19's s0;i'j_0.f' PW. 12, whose lands have been submerged<\/p>\n
 \u00e91_11d under the special scheme he was eligible for<\/p>\n
  'fEhd5i'}:itatiOI1. Accordingly, he made an application to the<\/p>\n
 ..__""Rehabi1it.atioI1 Celiter under the specific pr0vis1'0I1_s of the<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
said scheme, he could get similar extent of A}.21.n'd..'o-ffliis<\/p>\n
choice. PW. 12 wanted to purchase certair1w_e'Xtent_:"of' lahtl vb <\/p>\n
and the prospective seller xvhcfi  \u00ab.Vrlece'1ifve:_.: <\/p>\n
cor1siderat.ion directly from the officlieh  12 gn'avd\u00e9'–.. <\/p>\n
effort to get the compensatlorrgr  the
\naccused who was  'vlhsbector in
\nRehabilitation Center   '\u00a33,000\/~ as
\nbribe to get  from Alamatti
\nOffice, in  asked PW. 10 to make
\neffort tomget atnount from the accused<\/p>\n
of\ufb01ce.    was made by PW.lO~<\/p>\n
_ compllajhaont ar1do_l_Vst,at.e\ufb01(1 that he told the accused that he<\/p>\n
~ for which the accused has made 21<\/p>\n
~ as a bribe in order to release the<\/p>\n
.compens'atiori amount towards the prospective seller of<\/p>\n
 "the land.\n<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
‘K<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
5. The land of PW.12–\u00bbRan1appa was <\/p>\n
U.K.P. Towards the same Government has sa.ur1c:tf_ienedt’ of <\/p>\n
‘\u00a350,000\/- as compensation.  ‘1’ <\/p>\n
Rehabiiitation Center at Bilagijn cOnnection,’with the’: <\/p>\n
\ncompensation, PW.10 had  who
\nwas the Revenue  tkuehuabilitation
\nCenter at Billagj. It   accused has
\ndemanded    in order to send
\nthe  the Special Deputy<\/p>\n
C0mn1is{si0n.er.”tAtan1at’ti_d’and. get sanctioned the amount
\non compassionate’A:_jgr0u’nds*; When the complainant
\nrequested t’h_e”aecused t,o._”redt1ce the amount, the accused
\ndid not _c0nside1′”\u00b0ar1d tofd the compfainant that on<\/p>\n
‘3″payrn.e’nt;,_A—Qt”$2,005’\/”4″”0i11y the cheque will be issued. On<\/p>\n
 had approached the accused and gave<\/p>\n
the ‘den1an’d.e_d’AV.::arnount of ‘1,000\/ — and requested him to<\/p>\n
issuethe {:h_e’jqLA1e. Accepting the same, the accused further<\/p>\n
Vh”-\u00ab.__”demanded; remainirlg of \u00a31,000\/–\u00bb for which PW.1O<\/p>\n
requested the accused that he would pay the.r.rje:1ja:’::.i::~g<\/p>\n
amount on 18.12.1997. On the said  <\/p>\n
approached the Lokayuktha  <\/p>\n
recorded the complaint. whichis rn’-arked  A\u00e9i11d”=e<\/p>\n
registered a case in Crime \/  offence
\npunishable under  .t.’\/’ of the
\nPrevention of Corr_1iptionV_Aet.VVah4d  Thereafter,
\nentrustment   EX.P.2. In the
\npresence of  been collected from
\nthe  rflotes of ’50\/- denomination<\/p>\n
each] before’  the Lokayukata Inspector<\/p>\n
 appleiti “Phenop’i1th’a1ein powder to the said currency notes<\/p>\n
  to count and again it was given to the<\/p>\n
co!n’p1ain’at\ufb01vt’.__ ‘mf’i’t[h a necessary iristructiori. When the<\/p>\n
V .hands ofithe PW.4 were washed in sodium carbonate<\/p>\n
it ‘:so1ui’tion,hthe said solution turned into pink colour. On the<\/p>\n
“day, the trap party went to Bilagi and as per<\/p>\n
“”.:i.nstr1,1ct:ions, the cromplairiant along with PW.i had<\/p>\n
\\<\/p>\n
approached the accused and as it is stated by _1’_4d’;a;i’d’<\/p>\n
1.0 that the accused demanded ‘L000\/– <\/p>\n
the same has been paid to the <\/p>\n
been collected and counted and thereafter  <\/p>\n
to the trap party, they  _intorV_  and
\nconducted the trap.   was
\nrecorded and  and 8 also
\nhave been    conducted, the
\nprosecution as per EXP. 1. As
\nper the   f, the trap team went to
\nBilagi at 16:00: hou”r–s:  at 17.20 hours near<\/p>\n
Rehabilitation  trap was conducted at 19.30<\/p>\n
ho_urs    -referred in EX.P.1 that after csondueting the<\/p>\n
trap; ih’e_1’1ar1djs .o\u00a5{;;.the accused were Washed in the sodium<\/p>\n
 (:arbona.t’e.s’o}Liti.on and it returned into expetrted (pink)<\/p>\n
\u00bb _\u00a2o1;o:.1:~. ‘ *-\n<\/p>\n
<3<\/p>\n
6. On the basis of the case made <\/p>\n
prosecution. the case has been registered in”-speiciai eas.e_ <\/p>\n
No.28 \/ 2001 on the file of Sessioz’:g.sHdttidge;i_Biagatiiiotvt”The<\/p>\n
prosecution has examined  _witnesses of which “PW.’1<is<\/p>\n
the shadow witness who stzppoited the  PW.2
\nis the police constablewiio  theh\u00e9otirt. PW.3
\nis the sanctioning authoritgtzpp accused as
\nper Ex.P.7.   during the
\nentrustment    the witnesses to the<\/p>\n
recovery of  '<C7!'VEtff1'C)_\u00a7'lI1t'. PWS 5 and 9 who were<\/p>\n
presenting..pdu1~ir;"gtth'e,_'t:p-Jjoceedings. PW.6 is the police<\/p>\n
_ constabtlewho br_ot1ght'FSL from Bangalore. PWS. '7 and 8.<\/p>\n
 Re11ab:1.itation=–._officers at Bllagi. PW.10 ls complainant.<\/p>\n
  Officer. PW. 12 is the land owner<\/p>\n
_whose Iand'*has been submerged. The documents have<\/p>\n
uh'"4t:beeris_.rnarked by the prosecution. which were marked as<\/p>\n
 to Ex.P.13 of which Ex.P.1 is trap panchanama.<\/p>\n
 is the entrusi.n1e{<. panchanama, Ex.P.6 is the<\/p>\n
l(l<\/p>\n
sealed cover containing FIR. Ex.P.7 is t.he sanctioning<\/p>\n
order. EX.P.l0 is the Complaint. On the basi4s..Vv_ic1+f:'i~the<\/p>\n
accused none have been examined as defense <\/p>\n
and documents have been markedmas E};\u00a7l);'1–:'_t0l"'EX.VD3. <\/p>\n
I53x.D.l is the statement made  <\/p>\n
police\u00abPW.5. Ex.D.2 is marked portion\u00bb on <\/p>\n
is the statement of PW. 12.\n<\/p>\n
7. The learned counsel  submitted<\/p>\n
that on t.he=basf;s o:i'”f:.;the’~prosect1’ti’on evidence of PWs.l, 3<\/p>\n
7, 8 10 ai1_d’1’_2′  10 is the complainant, he<\/p>\n
has deposedlin his’vehA1ei”e\u00a7tamination that the landowner<\/p>\n
 yottngei’ ‘i::ro’ther of his father, they are residing<\/p>\n
in  PW.l2 M his uncle owned two acres of<\/p>\n
  landand the was subinerged. The Government was<\/p>\n
..h_lf_j:,.\u00abdecided ‘to__A’distribut:ir’1g Compensation of “\u00a330,000\/– to the<\/p>\n
A }ji*ospec:ive seller. Since PW.l2 was aged he was looking<\/p>\n
  the Office work. \u00a7<e identified the accused present<\/p>\n
before the Court and fnrtlier he submitted that in the<\/p>\n
month of November, 1997 the accused has dE?II1&1.ifI'\u20acllE:.?:(Zl_:.I1lfl\u20ac<\/p>\n
said amount. He asked him to how n1uch_.A"an<1olL1vn't:l  <\/p>\n
would pay, in response he told that._l1e<\/p>\n
'i,0O0\/- for which the accused di"d.iVno_t "a;gf\u00e9e,f;rl_ <\/p>\n
as a bribe of which of Rs, 1,OOl0.l\/:l;~\u00bb.g11notiat  for" 7<\/p>\n
the remaining amount. he v.treqi;1eslt'e,d for"'-some time.<\/p>\n
Accordingly, he made   the police at<\/p>\n
Billagi on 18. 1 2. 7199.7.\n<\/p>\n
8. Vi-t_ is in the chief examination<\/p>\n
since he ditllnot agree~.Vtllo’..play the balance amount and he<\/p>\n
 .__th\u20ac”lllO}i8;y’LEl{tha police on l7.l2.l997 at<\/p>\n
 Lokayuktha Officer was not available<\/p>\n
  anti  was taken to Bijapur lokayukatha police<\/p>\n
lll7’*’.,..44_lst,ation dmring the said night. He further deposed that<\/p>\n
   carried FIR to the open Court and the amount<\/p>\n
“9–oizlvliich was collected from the complainant of a<\/p>\n
ll<\/p>\n
approached the Lokayuktha and made a <\/p>\n
is the Deputy Commissioner of Gulbarga  _& it<\/p>\n
chief examination satisfying <\/p>\n
committed by the accused. _I~fIe has ‘givenT,s!ah:ction: <\/p>\n
prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
10. Pw.4 is the during the
\nentrustment mahaaar at  t\ufb01recovereol the
\namount frorriitne   examination, he
\nhas   ‘t.hei’.V_panch’a”Witnesses conducted the
\ntrap, the}-eaEft_er the hands which turned into
\nexpecteda coiourt’   V i’<\/p>\n
.5 th-e\u00ab”head constable who was present<\/p>\n
 tjroceedings who also supported the<\/p>\n
pr0s’ect1tion–cuase and the soiution collected after Washing<\/p>\n
 T-is s_eized__aIici. the aznount collectecl frorn__the_ .. . _<\/p>\n
  ;a:~Lcu_s\u00e9a is also seized. Pw.6 is the police constable, who<\/p>\n
 …_’1jjifot1ght the FSL report;Kfrom Bangalore wherein a<\/p>\n
accordingly it was prepared and narrated _…t.he_'”v.%1qo’ie<\/p>\n
proceedings at Billagi to trap the accused.H__ln.,vi’eW of t’n–e_ <\/p>\n
said evidence on behalf of the  <\/p>\n
counsel for the prosecution \u00bbsubmitted~that.vt–i1e:’cAas\u00e93 has\ufb01<\/p>\n
been made out beyond  accused
\nwas charged for the of1″en”c.es  Sections 7,
\n13{l](d) r\/w. 32% of   the proper
\npunishment    accused. Hence
\nhe made   punishment on the
\naccused: 1 . anheal and also further
\nsubmitted’  filed by the accused.\n<\/p>\n
 _ _ accused’; also filed an appeal in<\/p>\n
by challenging the order passed by the<\/p>\n
 on the following grounds;\n<\/p>\n
I51’irn’arily it is submitted by him that the accused<\/p>\n
   retired from his service and at this point of time if<\/p>\n
 punishment. is irnpd\u00e9ed, it is only hardship to the<\/p>\n
16<\/span><\/p>\n
person and no where a servant, for the purpose_loi’V”i1e–.h’is<\/p>\n
punishment. Consequently, he has submitted thjatlll’the;;e_ V’<\/p>\n
is in built flaw in the prosecution case’. .. “l’_he’ prosecution<\/p>\n
has not proved its case beyond reasonable  1 <\/p>\n
trap panchanama Ex.P.l  the the
\ntrap team went it  lclornlpound of
\nRehabilitation office the  who in chief
\nexamination parked the jeep one
\nkm. away   in chief examination
\nhas depose_d.Aawarelof the proceedings went
\nin the of1A’iceTof  The accused himself has<\/p>\n
made ;a”Written’ s_tatern’ent as per Ex.P.12 that there were<\/p>\n
   members together in the office. while going<\/p>\n
outl’s.i_dell’\u00a7ro:m  office someone put these currency notes<\/p>\n
V in his  he did not notice and the accused has<\/p>\n
  alleged demand made by PW.10. PVV.-4 in his<\/p>\n
..[\u00ab’_–(:h’.-ief “examination himself has deposed that he was not<\/p>\n
 aizlieire about how much amount paid to the accused and<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
aiso not aware about the powder which was..__’v_.sed’=.for<\/p>\n
solution and he parked his vehicle one km a\\3’vayvtironi’iti;e_ V’ <\/p>\n
office and he has also deposed <\/p>\n
were washed and it did not turn to ‘pink co1o,i._tr.:. “IrI”o\\xfe\u00ab\\.fer;”wVs<\/p>\n
he answered the question
\nparking the jeep one    respect of
\ninsistence in  ttije.’–V’p1*osecution in
\ntheir evidence,  ‘learned  referred in the
\nevidence of    he has deposed
\nthat   100 feet away from the<\/p>\n
office and  \u00bbWas–   about the main door of the<\/p>\n
 Reha];\u00a7i1ita.tion office’ and the evidence of PW.7 in respect of<\/p>\n
 itofjfjersons ail 1.00w15O members in front of the<\/p>\n
‘co.rrobore1ted. The statement of the accused has<\/p>\n
-vstated that”someone from gathering put the notes into<\/p>\n
V ‘  :p.atrrt  ocket.\n<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
13. PW.8 has deposed that on <\/p>\n
information received from Special Deputy Clommflssiionerl <\/p>\n
pertaining to the uncle of the”; coinpvlainaiitln*3gnd”V’Vori\u00ab<\/p>\n
17.12.1997 the accused has fo’miardedp,’.–“.the 2<\/p>\n
pertaining to the uncle of the  an
\nendorsement. to his offi’c:e_I’:.In  1(‘)H,'”tlV’AiVe learned
\ncounsel submitted   said to have
\nbeen paid to     was issued. It is
\nmentioned   issuance of receipt which
\nitself shows  not been established<\/p>\n
that the   With regard to the time<\/p>\n
 of preparing th’e.._V_en_tru:stment panchanama which varies<\/p>\n
AW_fl’.O’Ii1, onev..witr.1ess to another witness. Under these<\/p>\n
ci’ri=cum’st,anIee_s’,~1..the learned counsel submitted to allow<\/p>\n
-this  and set aside the order.\n<\/p>\n
it it ‘*-..i4.”‘Ii1 support of his submission relied upon the<\/p>\n
  reported in 2004 {2} KCCR 1233 in the case of<\/p>\n
‘K.\n<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
Rcyendran Vs. State by Police Inspector <\/p>\n
made in para 9 of the judgment that in <\/p>\n
corroboration for the evidence of panch_ Witr__icS’ses”‘ no<\/p>\n
reiiance could be placed on the’–Astatemer\ufb01dpdof <\/p>\n
complainant and conviction cafiiinotpbe   10~
\ncomplainant in his  llavsstated that
\nthe officers havepiack   vital facts.
\nThis   :h}:r:’V.t”r1eVVV’:iAearned counsel in
\nrespect of   aiglother official witnesses
\ndid notl  wexamination, PW.4 has<\/p>\n
deposed  ,1″io-tpdaddvvare about the proceedings<\/p>\n
‘V went_i;ntoa.t11eVot’fi.ce of the Lokayuktha. He further deposed<\/p>\n
  went in a jeep. which was parked 10<\/p>\n
kin_.””.away\\’_~f1fo:ij’tile office, but controversy evidence of<\/p>\n
V    and other official witnesses have deposed<\/p>\n
the  was parked 100 ft. away which is contrary to<\/p>\n
 10, that the jeep was parked by the side of the<\/p>\n
“-\u00abiicdorhpourtd oi’ the office.  aspect the proceedings in the<\/p>\n
18. On the basis of the submissions <\/p>\n
the parties, the points that arise for my consid’e.1jatioe11i’are: <\/p>\n
1. Whether the prosecutionfiliast’ proved of<\/p>\n
trap on the accused heyond’.aiI’reason’2i.’oie ‘doiiIot?h  pp<\/p>\n
2. Whether the Session’s’Vi’e\u00bbtT..3:’ou_rt  all
\nthe aspects of   _ —\n<\/p>\n
My answer would   theprosecution for
\nthe followingr\ufb02       <\/p>\n
I have the L.C.R. and the records<\/p>\n
placed before me”andaisoippiithrough the depositions of the<\/p>\n
partiee. ” is a ‘shadow witness Whose evidence<\/p>\n
 cor”roborates_Wi_th the case of prosecution. His evidence is<\/p>\n
  important for the prosecution. In View<\/p>\n
V of  faet.'”t11at he deposed that while accused was<\/p>\n
44″‘deriiandih’g the bribe from P.W.}.O, he was standing and<\/p>\n
 both the parties and on the basis of the demand<\/p>\n
 by the accused, %s\/.10 has taken out thousand<\/p>\n
‘-.\n<\/p>\n
“)7<\/p>\n
rupees from the front pocket of the shirt and <\/p>\n
to the accused. The same was counted  ftfhe’ V’<\/p>\n
pocket of his pant. This <\/p>\n
important in View of the factcthat th-efcase <\/p>\n
the accused had demanded anfdeiaccepted.thefbrfhe,d2vhich
\nis corroborated by   further
\ndeposes that on 18\/ 12 they ieft the
\noffice of   r1\u00a7’;o”.V’f:c1’oc:1:<Vv":'arrd'::reached Bilagi at
\n5.20 p.n:1.  fvehicle close to the
\nRehabilitatiofn the P.W.10 informed<\/p>\n
that the accursedv  office and thereafter both<\/p>\n
_v P.W."1 ;jar1d. 1OVWe.nVt to the office and he stood Very close to<\/p>\n
   .ffric.ticed the demand made by accused. This<\/p>\n
 proves the case of prosecution. After<\/p>\n
the ei'1t1"yVAoI\u00b0"tcr::1p team the accused was insisted to co-<\/p>\n
ff "'V.e;f3e1'~cate to clear} his hand and thereafter the hands were<\/p>\n
-[washed in the soiution and the same turned into pink<\/p>\n
“u_c:oic)t.1r. The same were marked as per 1\\\/1.0. No.5, 5(a), 6<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
and 6(a). On demand of the accused, he has <\/p>\n
amount of Rs.1,000\/~ in the right pocket  <\/p>\n
before them. All the notes, which :weVrfe’i’evcove1’efdffrornfthne.<\/p>\n
accused were counted a11,d_ tialflied-._ with,.”;_t’he\u00b0 <\/p>\n
panchanama. Though P.W.1 hVas::(.iepose’dthat   not
\naware about what  iI,oka$}uRt.a, but it
\nis not very material to  ‘of:v:fpr’osecution. In
\nthe cross–exan1ina:tii:on  about the
\nbribe   by the accused and
\nthereafter   in solution, which<\/p>\n
converted ir;t.o pink””co1,.oi3–rf’and also panchanama as per<\/p>\n
 Ex.  d1’aw_n the Office itself in the presence of<\/p>\n
 :.i’\u00a7:e’\u00ab–has further deposed that Ex.P–2 was not<\/p>\n
 office of Lokayukta. The discrepancy<\/p>\n
— eVide.rice”—Vof ‘P”:W.1 is that he does not remember in which<\/p>\n
 “qrQOfi’i-.4_thE3H’Et(:C1,1S\u20acd was sitting in the office. There is some<\/p>\n
..finfconsfistency with regard to the time also, but that itself<\/p>\n
not sufficient to sa{:<t.hat the evidence of P.W.1 is<\/p>\n
r–.3
\n'.JI<\/p>\n
papers he has satisfied himself and <\/p>\n
Lokayukta to prosecute the accused.   <\/p>\n
Disciplinary Authority of the <\/p>\n
the Court that he is satisfied  the_aC:as'e"of':i'theKp<\/p>\n
prosecution which aiso suppor"'ts:.V'the mPV.W.4
\nis a pancha for recovery"i~ancT_VAheeserituthroughout
\nthe proceediiigsiy   an Assistant
\nExecutive  ':11   he has
\nnarrated  Went on in the
\noffice  Recovery Office and he<\/p>\n
has supported  He has deposed that<\/p>\n
V the  tearri  to Bilagi by jeep and it was parked<\/p>\n
   Though the said evidence goes<\/p>\n
 of P.W.1, 10 and ii, but it is not<\/p>\n
very useful to disbelieve the case of prosecutioii. He has<\/p>\n
it  deposed that the accused was trapped and also he<\/p>\n
-ffwa’s a\ufb02witness to Ex.P–2 the panehanama. In his cross<\/p>\n
“gexa.r11inatio11 also he fortifies the case of prosecution<\/p>\n
*{<\/p>\n
T his evidence goes to show that accused was xt.rapp’ed:;~byx<\/p>\n
the team of P.W.l 1. which supports proseetitioh  % {Io _\u00ab V’ <\/p>\n
erossexamination P.W.7 has  <\/p>\n
18\/ 12\/ 1997′ when he was working if:  of\ufb01eel. <\/p>\n
150 persons were standing  ‘of.   and
\naccused was working   trap team has
\ntaken the accusedinsideHth’\u00a7::..o1;iiee:  he learnt that
\nthey are the  P.W.8, who is
\nalso an  of Rehabilitation, has
\nalso  was also trapped on
\n18\/ 12\/ 1 99?\n<\/p>\n
_1;8.” PW; l’E).,_V_VVwhoV’ is the Complainant has deposed<\/p>\n
 1viO\u00ab..and 12 were living in the joint family and<\/p>\n
tlii’e.’l2i.\u00a3_}d  PW. I2, which was submerged and he<\/p>\n
V was e’z1titl:ed”‘.Vfor the Rehabilitation Scheme for which<\/p>\n
  was granted as a compensation and in order<\/p>\n
 advislblurse the said amou;<1t the accused had demanded a<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
sum of Rs.5.000\/– and in the month of <\/p>\n
has paid Rs.l,0OO\/~ to accused and <\/p>\n
time to pay the remaining 'cH1'1OUT1'E:.l\u00a2':l11C!_l lbeflorei  <\/p>\n
to the Lokayukta Of\ufb01ce a.r1d m_ade  elompla:intt..l..<\/p>\n
the sealed cover containing   sentlto the
\nCourt and he has   has also
\ndeposed in his  — was
\ngiven to the   smeared vsdth
\npowder  kept in his shirt
\nand  accused inside the office.\n<\/p>\n
Thereafter  has”wgii\/’er;sthemsigrial as per the instruction of<\/p>\n
Lokayiiktha police: V Everi in the cross–e:x:amir1atioI1 at para<\/p>\n
 ll\\l.o;7?’_.lll1e _has.ide.r1ied the suggestions made by accused that<\/p>\n
he, has  a””ialse complaint in order to knock out<\/p>\n
 .Rs.6G;OOvQ\/\u00e9vbayable to the prospective seller. At para<\/p>\n
 his evidence he has deposed that the jeep in which<\/p>\n
 been to Bilagi was parked near Badagandi road,<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
the said distance is at a place of less than a..,_i{:i1o1net1*e<\/p>\n
from the Rehabilitation Office 0i”Bi1agi.<\/p>\n
19.P.W.iI is aiso an  <\/p>\n
narrated before the Court inthe cross\u00e9examination a.bout*a<\/p>\n
the trap conducted where the accused   taken into
\ncustody. P.W.}2, who  the Scheme in
\nhis crossmexarnination   he had not<\/p>\n
executed any of tto’5P;’w”JfiO and further he<\/p>\n
was  date””1:ne application was filed
\nin the ” informed P.W.1O to get the<\/p>\n
cheque for the cornperzsatibon amount and P.W. 10 in turn<\/p>\n
“has   he  awarded Rs.60,000\/– and hence<\/p>\n
.to_.the office. In his crosswexamination he<\/p>\n
has’f_urt11er– that P.W.1O has informed him about<\/p>\n
 the bl’ib\u20ac ff3\u20acI1″1E11’1d(~3d by accused. Later he has informed<\/p>\n
   about the demand made by accused. In turn he<\/p>\n
 directed P.W.1O Chandrashekar to \ufb01le a complaint.<\/p>\n
‘<<\/p>\n
hours he responded that accused was present in__'the'chair<\/p>\n
and then P.W.1 and 4 went to the spot and  K V' <\/p>\n
P.W.10 came outside and made ._to_ _:t-\u00e9ahm';<\/p>\n
then trap team went inside _the4"of\ufb01<:e andlrtliey <\/p>\n
introduced themselves to the'v"i'a:ccIJ'sedV" also
\ndisclosed that he is   and on
\ndeputation h_e is iyorking  10 was asked
\nabout what    in response he
\nhas stated    1,000\/–on demand
\nand the" counted from both the<\/p>\n
hands anddiept in side pocket of pant. One<\/p>\n
V Biradar"was as'l{.eVd to tgnrepare the solution and thereafter<\/p>\n
in  1ooth_.Vthe."'llianid's_of accused were washed and the liquid has<\/p>\n
tt:rn'e_d\u00ab colour and the same was stored in the<\/p>\n
V bottle" an'd.r1'3a1'ked as MO. No.1, 5 and 5(a). It is further<\/p>\n
it  EXP-1 that accused had taken Rs. 1,000\/– from<\/p>\n
 tjocket, of his pant and the same was counted and all<\/p>\n
 notes were tallied with the entrustment and the same<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
Judge, Bijapur on 18\/12\/1997 and F3x.P~\u00bb4 is <\/p>\n
of P.W.2. Ex.P–4 is the report made to the  _& it <\/p>\n
about handing over of the c11r1'enc;\u00a7} notes.'  <\/p>\n
the Acknowledgment to that'e_ffectlli–sllas peril-";E33\u00a7\u00a7v\u00a7'P?8 <\/p>\n
the Special Court about receiifin:g'of F the
\nstatement made by P.W;?..  of the
\naccused preparedpby  as Ex.Pw12,
\nwherein it is  himself has
\ncollected the.  VVhen the hands of
\naccusedivglwereiriit did not turn into pink<\/p>\n
colour. TheplFi.SiL;o.  rnarked as per Ex. P-13, item<\/p>\n
V Nos.5,.;6 and '?.,disclose that one sealed quarter bottle<\/p>\n
1'7,Cl\ufb01}1'E\u00a3tlIiSF'tlflCl:4SQluti0I1 in which the right hand of A.G.O.<\/p>\n
was 'Item No. 6 contains the solution in which<\/p>\n
V the left was washed. In the opinion it has been<\/p>\n
 "refcrmd as "presence of ions of phenoiphthalate were<\/p>\n
-.jdelt’ected by Spectral and T.L.C. Prodiles in solution in<\/p>\n
“particle No. 1, 5, 6: powder in article No.2 currency in<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
3:}:\n<\/p>\n
article No. 7 and pant in article No.8.” This <\/p>\n
goes to show that when the accused handsp’tmere.A_:vuashed <\/p>\n
in solution, the sa.me turned into };)ink_Ac'(,-\u00ab-Eo’=,,1r’1an_c_1’itwproyes<\/p>\n
that the accused has committred the”o_ft”ence of7r.2orrupt;ion_  up<\/p>\n
21. In the light of ail theuivdfriaterials ‘placed hgefore the
\nSessions Court. the   held that the
\nprosecution has proved..b.e.yond. ali  doubt that<\/p>\n
the accused  the bribe from<\/p>\n
P.W.10,vvi’Vv’hich’:i:is &vnfo’thi’nhg”‘-hut”‘a11′”:offence. The materials
\nare produced on  accused as per E.x.D–1 to 3.<\/p>\n
The statement made  police as per Ex.P~5 and EX.D-<\/p>\n
 V’ .:poirtionx’on'”EX.P– 10 and Ex.D\u00ab~3 statement of<\/p>\n
 “way heipfui to the accused which fail to<\/p>\n
disprove the” of the prosecution. The complaint was<\/p>\n
T33-‘\u00ab.___Vmade before the police and the F.I.R. was forwarded to the<\/p>\n
  pv.(“?Vdt)u.rtf.on the very same day without loss of any time and<\/p>\n
   and 4 were summoned to the office on the same day<\/p>\n
and entrust par1ehar1arna was prepared and immediately<\/p>\n
trap teantt went to the spot and after ConduetingvViheiiitaid<\/p>\n
the currency notes which were collected from-the’ <\/p>\n
were talhed with the entrust panehanarn-at”a’s::per”VE_XiP=~2″V’<\/p>\n
and the Certi\ufb01cate issued by  the <\/p>\n
authority after satisfying theveiase rr’rade.onit_agai~ns’t thee’<\/p>\n
accused and the evidence of  8 to’the effect that<\/p>\n
the raid was made against-‘the the said date
\nand time and thg;fp.resenee  PH’\\rV:;~1V\\1 his team on the<\/p>\n
said date theyVgo=bey_oan..d reasonable doubt and proves<\/p>\n
the case ofprose<:1.i'tion."'—._After examining the materials<\/p>\n
V and e'fy'i(ier1ee orrpvbehaiif of the prosecution I have gone<\/p>\n
 thr'ei,iig11jtIdgment of the Sessions Court and examined<\/p>\n
itar1'd__I f(Jiind'~no infirrnities or scope to interfere in this<\/p>\n
V –()rder:" Aeeordingiy, I am satis\ufb01ed with the reasons<\/p>\n
 '}ass'ign4ed therein and also the evidence of prosecution No<\/p>\n
-.i.ap’ses’AAhave been committed by the lower Court. The<\/p>\n
 taken by the prosecution in the appeal is for<\/p>\n
<<\/p>\n
enhancement, of the sentence. I find it is not worth.'\u00e9it'\u00bb this<\/p>\n
stage since the accused has already retired i'ron1._ser'vice ii.)<\/p>\n
enhance the punishrnent. Accordingly, the.Ve;:o1:.1:ea1A_i.filed  V' <\/p>\n
prosecution for enhancement. of pu11.is'hnLient".is_"elsc<\/p>\n
dismissed. Since I answer the abovAe"'points5Tin "feivoLa1'<ol'*g<\/p>\n
prosecution, the appeal of accused for'Vs_et'ting inside the
\norder does not arise.\n<\/p>\n
Accordingly, appeals -are  <\/p>\n
sd\/2..\n<\/p>\n
J UD-GE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010 Author: L.Narayana Swamy _ V Baga1,1\u00a7Ci,. IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD _ DATED THIS THE 23TH DAY or ~ BEFORE J ” “V THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CRLIMINAL AI=PEA’L._I\u00a7:o. u CmMINAL’.%II%PEA:jL x2003 H V In Criminal […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-230577","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nState Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-09-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-24T07:14:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"22 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-24T07:14:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":4157,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010\",\"name\":\"State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-24T07:14:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-24T07:14:31+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"22 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-24T07:14:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010"},"wordCount":4157,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010","name":"State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-24T07:14:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-gesudraj-abdulvahab-shaikh-on-28-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Karnataka vs Gesudraj Abdulvahab Shaikh on 28 September, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230577","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=230577"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230577\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=230577"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=230577"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=230577"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}