SATPAL Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of present Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant seeks following relief, among others:

(2.) It may be mentioned, at the very outset, that the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant after substantial prosecution evidence has been recorded by the trial court. Needless to say that the charge was already framed against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Sections 7, 8, 12, 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'P.C. Act'), to which, he (applicant herein) pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant fairly submitted, at the very outset, that the arguments, which he is going to advance today before this Court, were not argued by the applicant at the time of framing of charge. The main plank of applicant's argument is that the special law will prevail over the general law. Learned counsel for the applicant cited decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suresh Nanda v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2008) 3 SCC 674; Pankajakshi (dead) through LRs & others v. Chandrika & others, AIR 2016 SC 1213 and P. Rajan Sandhi v. Union of India & another, 2010 (10) SCALE 163 in this regard.