STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. KRISHNA CHANDRA SAKSENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) We have heard learned advocates of parties on merits with their consent. This appeal is, therefore, being finally disposed of by this judgment. The appellant is the State of Madhya Pradesh. The respondent was sought to be prosecuted under Section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the basis of a trap case. A learned Single Judge of the High court, A. S. Tripathi, J. by the impugned judgment quashed the criminal proceedings against the respondent in a petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'criminal Procedure Code') and that is how the State is in appeal against the said judgment.

(3.) A few relevant facts may be noted at the outset. The respondent was a Medical Officer in the service of the appellant-State. He was posted at the relevant time as District Project Officer, Danida in Madhya Pradesh. One Sunil Jain, a representative of Kankur Laboratories, Ahmedabad made a complaint against him of demand of bribe on 1/1/1987 to the Vigilance Branch of Lok Aayukt. On his complaint a trap was laid on 2/1/1987 and the respondent was trapped and arrested. After completion of investigation sanction for prosecution of the respondent was granted by the State government on 27/7/1989. Before the challan could be filed on the basis of the aforesaid case registered as Crime Case No. 4 of 1987 at Vigilance Branch of Lok Aayukt, Gwalior, the respondent preferred a petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code at the Gwalior bench of the High court of Madhya Pradesh challenging this sanction order on three grounds (i) the grant of sanction by the Department of Law was without the authority of law; (ii) the prosecution sanction was given against principles of natural justice having been granted without hearing the respondent; and (iii) the grant ofsanction amounted to abuse of the process of the court. Because of the stay order granted by the High court on 4/8/1989 in those proceedings the challan could not be filed before the competent court. In the meantime the record of the case was lost in the High court. Proceedings dragged on for a couple of years on the file of the High court. During this period the respondent got promoted to the post of Chief Medical Officer and was further promoted as Joint Director of Gwalior and Raipur and then he retired on attaining superannuation in June 1993.