MANOJBHAI BHAGWANDAS SHAH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Revision the order of Shri S.D.Dave, Special Judge, Ahmedabad, is under challenge. Under the impugned order he has rejected the final report submitted by the Anti Corruption Bureau (for short "A.C.B.") and issued summons to the revisionist u/s.190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "Cr.P.C.").

(2.) The brief facts are that the complainant Nayanbhai K. Patel lodged F.I.R. on 27.3.1998 before A.C.B. against the revisionist. Allegations of corruption were made against the revisionist which were investigated by the A.C.B. and ultimately it was revealed during investigation that there was no evidence to file charge-sheet against the accused revisionist. Accordingly final report was submitted. On receipt of final report the Special Judge issued notice to the complainant. The complainant appeared through Advocate Shri K.I.Patel and filed protest petition Ex.8 with zerox copies of Judgments. Additional list of documents was also produced by the complainant. After perusing the final report and the documents, running in 300 pages, the Special Judge found that it was not a case for acceptance of final report. Accordingly he took cognizance of the offence u/s.190(1)(b) or 190(1)(c) of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly summons was issued to the accused revisionist. It is therefore this Revision.

(3.) The only short point urged by Shri J.B.Pardiwala, learned Counsel for the revisionist in this revision was that since the revisionist is a public servant working as Deputy Manager, Union Bank of India, Varachha Road, Surat, cognizance of the offences allegedly committed by him could not be taken by the Special Judge without prior sanction of the Competent Authority. He has placed reliance upon Section 19(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.