PRABHAT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant in this proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is an Arms Clerk in the Ria Bareilly Collectorate. He is said to have demanded Rs. 2400/- from the Opp, Party No. 2 as bribe for grant of arms licence, in which connection he is sought to be prosecuted under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

(2.) At the commencement of Trial before the Special Judge, the applicant raised a plea that he could not be prosecuted without a sanction being obtained from the District Magistrate, who was his appointing authority and since no sanction has been obtained, the prosecution could not proceed. The learned Judge overruled this objection and held by his order dated 9-12-1998 that no sanction was necessary for the prosecution of the applicant.

(3.) The only question canvassed at the bar and arising in the petition, therefore, is whether sanction for prosecution of the petitioner was necessary or not?