SRIJANA SHRESTHA Vs. KHAJAN SINGH & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner describes himself as an advocate practising in the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur. He, joining with the sixth respondent, had submitted an application before the Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), New Delhi registered as Application no.01/2013 on 08.07.2013, seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of the said court under Section 156(3) of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr. PC) to seek investigation into certain offences allegedly committed by the first to fourth respondents and certain others, such offences statedly being punishable under Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Sections 120B, 166 167, 169, 175, 197, 217, 218, 409, 441, 467, 468, 469, 471 and 466 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). Noticeably, the first respondent is described as the competent authority appointed by notification of Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways (Department of Road, Transport & Highways) of the Government of India, the acts of commission and omission attributed to the third respondent pertaining to the period when she was the Chief Minister of the State of Rajasthan or the period during which she was leader of opposition in the Legislative Assembly of the State of Rajasthan. Similarly, the fourth respondent is generally described as officers of the Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways (Department of Road, Transport & Highways) of the Government of India which would put them as well in the category of public servants.

(2.) The Special Judge, by her order dated 18.04.2015, held that in absence of the sanction under Section 197 of Cr. PC, she could not proceed further referring in this context to the ruling of the Supreme Court in Anil Kumar and Ors. Vs. M.K. Aiyappa, (2013) 10 SCC 705. Feeling aggrieved by the aforementioned order of the Special Judge, the present petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 Cr. PC.

(3.) In M.K. Aiyappa , the Supreme Court ruled thus :