RAVI NATH VERMA,J. - (1.) Invoking the inherent power of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Code'), the present petitioner has prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of R.C. Case No. 05(A)/2014-D including order dated 06.06.2014 passed by learned Special Judge, C.B.I., Dhanbad whereby and where under cognizance of offence under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 has been taken and further for quashing of the order dated 16.07.2015 passed by the said court refusing to discharge the petitioner which was brought on record by amendment subsequently.
(2.) The factual score, as depicted in the F.I.R. lodged at the instance of the Superintendent of Police, CBI: ACB:Dhanbad, based on a complaint filed by one Surendra Kumar Singh, a Proprietor of M/s. Surendra Kumar & Co., in short, is that the said complainant Surendra Kumar Singh lodged a complaint before S.P., CBI, Dhanbad with the allegation that the petitioner, who is a Senior Section Engineer (W) I, Engineering Branch, EC Railway, Dhanbad demanded an illegal gratification of L 30,000/- from him for taking steps to prepare the M.Bs. (Measurement Books) and bills of completed five civil works related to repair of railway quarters etc. of E.C. Railway, Dhanbad. After verification of genuineness of the said complaint, the case was lodged and the petitioner was caught by trap team on the spot while demanding and accepting L 30,000/- from the said complainant in presence of independent witnesses.
(3.) After completion of the investigation, the CBI submitted the charge sheet on 05.06.2014 and, thereafter, sanction was obtained under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act from the competent authority. The Court of learned Special Judge, CBI, Dhanbad took cognizance of the offence vide order dated 06.06.2014 under Sections 7 and 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. After filing of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, the petitioner filed an interlocutory application bearing no. 4537 of 2015 for amendment with prayer to add an additional prayer for quashing of the order dated 16.07.2015 whereby the court below has rejected the petition filed for his discharge under Section 239 of the Code finding sufficiency of materials on record to frame charge in which cognizance has been taken.;