- (1.) Inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, has been invoked by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 1st September 2008 vide which learned Special Judge, CBI, Delhi, has declined to first decide the application dated 24th July 2008 and has ordered that since the main case was listed for final arguments, therefore, all the points including the point of sanction would be heard and decided by him in accordance with law. Learned Special Judge, CBI had given the liberty to the petitioner to file written submission on or before 8th September 2008 as counsel for the petitioner was not available before the learned Special Judge on the date fixed for arguments and the main case has now been posted for 15th September 2008 for orders.
(2.) The grievance of the petitioner made before this court is that pardon has been granted to one Mr. Ravi Bhat on 2nd November 1996 by a Metropolitan Magistrate who was directed by the learned Special Judge, to decide the application for grant of pardon. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this court to sub-section 2 of Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to contend that the jurisdiction to grant pardon is that of the Special Judge, CBI and this power cannot be delegated to a Metropolitan Magistrate.
(3.) In the impugned order, learned Special Judge, CBI has observed that the aforesaid question of the competence to decide about the jurisdiction to grant pardon has been already taken into consideration while passing order dated 25th January 2000 by his learned predecessor when the order on charge was passed and the learned Special Judge did not have the power to review the aforesaid order:-;