K.N.PHANEENDRA, J. - (1.) The present petition is filed seeking quashing of the order dated 9.1.2017 passed by the III Addl. Sessions and Special Judge, Mysuru, in Special Case No. 74/2012 wherein the trial Court has passed an order regarding the "validity of the sanction" issued against the petitioner to prosecute him for the offence under section 13(1)(e) punishable under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, by the Government of Karnataka.
(2.) The undisputed facts are that: "The petitioner is a public servant (Government servant) working as Motor Vehicles Inspector, RTO Office, Sakleshpur. The respondent Karnataka Lokayukta Police, Mysuru, after thorough investigation submitted a charge sheet on 22.09.2012 against the petitioner for the above said offences before the Special Court. The petitioner at the initial stages called in question the proceedings of the trial Court questioning the cognizance taken by the court on the ground that the sanction accorded to prosecute the accused is invalid. He challenged the said sanction Order under section 19(4) of the P.C. Act by filing an application before the trial court. The trial Court rejected the said application. In turn, petitioner has challenged the said order before this court in Criminal Petition No. 7554/2015. This court vide order dated 3.2.2016 quashed the trial court's order and made certain observations and remitted the matter to the trial Court. At paragraph 5 of its order, this court has made the following observation: "Xxxxx it is required for the court to frame charges and record the evidence. It is desirable that the prosecution may be called upon to adduce evidence about the validity of sanction firstly and thereafter proceed with other witnesses. After recording of the evidence of the disciplinary authority or other witnesses who are responsible to accord sanction, if so required the learned special judge may give finding about the validity of sanction in accordance with law."
(3.) After the said direction issued by this court, the prosecution has led evidence, examined one Ramachandra, working as Under Secretary, Transport Department, Government of Karnataka as P.W. 1. After hearing both the parties and perusing the relevant materials on record, the Special Court has passed the impugned order again holding that the sanction accorded to prosecute the petitioner is by the competent authority i.e., State Government and there is due application of mind by the appropriate authority before passing the sanction order. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner is again before this court calling in question the said order before this court on various grounds.;