P.K.LOHRA,J. - (1.) By the instant revision petition, under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr. P.C., petitioner-complainant has challenged order dated 13th of October, 2017 passed by Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act, Jodhpur (for short, 'learned trial Court'). The learned trial Court, by the order impugned, has declined to send the complaint of petitioner for investigation under sub-section (3) of Section 156 Cr. P.C. in absence of sanction for prosecution of the accused under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
(2.) The facts, in brief, are that petitioner-complainant submitted a criminal complaint before learned trial Court against the accused attributing offence under Section 10, 12, 13 and 15 of the P.C. Act read with Section 341, 323, 161, 167, 171(d) and 120-B IPC. Essentially, the complaint was against the police authorities.
(3.) After examining the complaint, the learned trial Court declined to send the same for investigation by citing the reason that there is no proper sanction for prosecution of the accused, who are public servants. While passing the impugned order, learned trial Court has relied on the decision of Supreme Court in L. Narayana Swamy v. State of Karnataka and Ors. ((2016) 9 SCC 598) , which has followed the dictum in case of Anil Kumar and Ors. v. M.K. Aiyappa and Anr. ((2013) 10 SCC 705).;