CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. A.RAJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Crl.M.A. 13703/2020 (by R-13); Crl.M.A. 13851/2020 (by R-2) and Crl.M.A. 14091/2020 (supplementary application by R-13)

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant/respondent No.13 submitted that the allegations levelled against the present applicant with other accused was of intentionally aiding and facilitating the payment of alleged quid pro-quo of Rs.200 crores as a reward for alleged undue favours shown to company M/s Swan Telecom Private Limited. Learned Special Court vide order dated 21st December, 2017 had acquitted all the accused persons including the present applicant. Thereafter, the petitioner/CBI has filed the instant leave to appeal against the said order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Court on 21st December, 2017. Learned counsel for applicant/respondent No.13 has, however, submitted that this Court cannot hear and decide the petition seeking 'leave to appeal' unless petitioner/CBI places the mandatory approval u/S 378(2) Cr.P.C. on record.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant/respondent No.13 had drawn attention of this Court to Section 378 of Cr.P.C. Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, learned counsel submitted that in terms of sub section 2(b) of Section 378 Cr.P.C. and Chapter 23 of CBI Manual, it is mandatory to obtain sanction/approval before filing the appeal/petition. He further submitted that appeal against acquittal cannot be filed without the directions/ sanction of the Government and petitioner's failure to place it on record goes to the root of the matter, as it would make the instant leave to appeal "non est". He also submitted that there is no document on record to show that there is sanction/authorization in favour of Mr.Sanjeev Bhandari, learned Special Public Prosecutor to file the instant petition or that Mr. Sanjay Jain, learned ASG Jain has been authorized to conduct the present appeal.