RAJASREE AJITH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the accused in C.C. No.8 of 2023 pending before the Court of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram. The Special Court as per the order dtd. 27/2/2023 took cognizance of the offence punishable under Sec. 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) read with Ss. 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act). The petitioner assails the said order in this petition filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code).

(2.) Annexure-3 is the final report filed by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB), Special Investigation Unit-I, Thiruvananthapuram. The said final report was filed in Crime No.5/13/SIU-I. There were 10 accused in the crime. A final report was initially filed excluding the petitioner, who was the 1st accused, based on which C.C.No.25 of 2020 was initiated. The prosecuting agency applied for sanction to prosecute the petitioner, she being a public servant as defined in Sec. 2(c) of the PC Act. The competent authority declined sanction vide Annexure-2 order. It was thereafter Annexure 3 final report was filed requesting to prosecute the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sec. 120B read with Ss. 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) of the PC Act, and also Sec. 120B read with Ss. 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC. The Special Court considered whether cognizance could be taken in respect of the offences alleged against the petitioner even without a sanction under Sec. 19(1) of the PC Act. The Special Court, after considering the matter in detail, held as per the impugned order that cognizance could be taken for the offences under Sec. 120B of the IPC read with Sec. 13(2) of the PC Act.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor and the Special Public Prosecutor (Vigilance).