(1.) Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record.
(2.) We have heard Sri Raj Kumar Kesari, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the material placed on record.
(3.) The petitioner is a Tehsildar. A First Information Report dated 2nd December, 2014 was lodged and after due investigation sanction was given by the competent authority on 27th April, 2016 to prosecute the petitioner in Case Crime No.1005 of 2014 under Section 420, 120B I.P.C. read with Sections 7, 8 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Sadabad, District Hathras. Based on the said sanction order, the trial court took cognizance and issued summons on 3rd May, 2016. The petitioner being aggrieved filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 37383 of 2016 under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 praying for quashing of charge sheet dated 3rd May, 2016. The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 was rejected by the Court by an order dated 6.12.2016. The petitioner was aware at that stage that sanction was granted by the competent court on 27th April, 2016. After the dismissal of application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 the petitioner has now filed present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing of the sanction order dated 27th April,2016 issued by the competent authority, namely, Chairman, Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow. The short submission raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no sanction has been granted by the competent authority under Section 19 of The Prevention of Corruption Act for prosecution of the petitioner. It was contended that in the absence of sanction granted under Section 19 of the Act, petitioner could not be summoned to face trial. It was urged that sanction order dated 27th April, 2016 has been issued under Section 197 Cr.P.C., 1973 whereas the Prevention of Corruption Act specifically requires a sanction order to be issued under the said Act itself.