A special court in Bengaluru rejected the B-report (closure report) submitted by the Karnataka Lokayukta police for lack of evidence.
Published Dec 23, 2022 | 1:48 PM ⚊ Updated Dec 23, 2022 | 3:11 PM
Karnataka Lokayukta
The Orange Bar case in 2014 has come back to haunt the current Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) Alok Kumar along with two other police officers.
A special court in Bengaluru rejected this month the B-report (closure report) submitted by the Karnataka Lokayukta police for lack of evidence.
The three police officers stand accused of demanding a bribe of ₹1 crore from Mallikarjuna MB, alias “Fighter” Ravi, to let him off in a criminal case.
Ravi, in his complaint to the Lokayukta on 31 May, 2015, stated that he had gone to Orange Bar and Restaurant on 30 August, 2014, along with his friends.
There, they had engaged in a brawl with the pub management, and the entire incident was captured on the pub’s CCTV cameras.
Both parties filed complaints against each other at the Vyalikaval Police Station, after which the then Additional Commissioner of Police (ACP) of the Seshadripuram sub-division, Daneshwar Rao, and Inspector Shankarachari started calling Ravi through a station writer and constable Chandrashekar alias Chandru.
They told him that they would “settle” the issue if he paid a heft sum.
Ravi, in his complaint to the Lokayukta, alleged that he borrowed ₹5 lakh from one of his friends and handed it over to Chandru.
The then ACP and the Vyalikaval police inspector were accused of receiving this Rs 5 lakh through Chandru on 1 September, 2014.
However, the following day, Ravi got another call from Chandru stating that this ₹5 lakh was handed over to Alok Kumar, who was the then ACP of the West Division.
Chandru also told Ravi that Kumar was demanding ₹1 crore — to be paid within 48 hours — to “settle” the case, failing which Ravi would be booked under various sections of the law, including the Arms Act, and a “rowdy sheet” would be opened against him as well.
Ravi also alleged that his relative named Putte Gowda — who was a sub-inspector with the Vyalikaval police station at the time — was also suspended in order to bring pressure on Ravi to pay the bribe.
Ravi apparently recorded all the phone conversations and is said to have attached them to the complaint he filed with the Lokayukta as evidence.
The case taken up by the Lokayukta police mentioned the accused Chandru as constable and station writer of the Vyalikaval Police station, who was in touch over the phone with Ravi.
Alok Kumar’s name did not figure either in the FIR or in the Call Detail Records (CDR) during the preliminary investigation.
The Lokayukta police concluded the investigation and on 19 March, 2022, filed a “B-report” in court, stating that there was no evidence against Daneshwar Rao and Shankarachari.
However, the special court, in its order rejecting the “B report” said it would hold an examination of the complaint under Section 200 of the CrPC.
This would allow the court to take cognisance of the complaint and initiate the examination itself.
Judge K Lakshminarayana Bhat heard a protest memo filed in March by the complainant in the case: Ravi. Putte Gowda also confirmed the allegations in his statement before the Lokayukta police.
Then, in its 13 December order, the court said the Lokayukta police had not considered the statements of Putte Gowda.
The investigating officer rejected Gowda’s claims. But it was for the court — and not the investigating officer — to decide if witness statements had to be rejected or accepted, the court said.
The court said that there was enough evidence in the case to proceed against the accused.
It said the Lokayukta police report was not comprehensive and transparent.
The report itself contained enough evidence to issue summons and interrogate the accused, the court said while rejecting the “B report”.
(With PTI inputs)
