(1.) THE above petitions have the complexion of Public Interest Litigation and have their genesis in the C.B.I enquiry conducted pursuant to the orders rendered by the Apex Court in Writ Petition No 13381 of 1984, M.C. Mehta v Union of India dated 27.11.2006 whereby the C.B.I had filed police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C alongwith the report of S.P. and entire related material against Ms. Mayawati, Sri Naseemuddin Siddiqui, Sri R.K.Sharma and Sri Rajendra Prasad under section 120 B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and section 13 (2) read with section 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
(2.) IN the aforesaid petition filed by M.C. Mehta (supra), the Apex Court gave following direction which are excerpted below.
(3.) THE contentions in all the petitions are identical and are two fold- firstly the impugned order of the designated court is patently illegal and secondly, the C.B.I despite knowing fully well that the aforesaid order is amenable to challenge, did not challenge the order. The further contention of the petitioners is that by means of the order of the Apex Court, the C.B.I was required to submit charge sheet in the court and instead of complying with the order, the C.B.I placed the charge sheet before the Governor and it was thereafter that the charge sheet was placed in the Court. It is submitted that by a stream of decisions of the Apex Court, the prior sanction would not extend its coverage to the offences under sections 120 B , 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. 5. The relief sought in Writ petition No 2087 of 2009 (M/B) filed by Anupama Singh is quoted below: