V.P. DHINGRA Vs. C.B.I.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, working as Superintending Engineer in the Electricity Department of Union Territory, Chandigarh, and accused of an offence under Ss. 7, 30(2) read with Sec. 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1989 has filed this revision petition, impugning the order passed by the Special Judge, C.B.I., Chandigarh, dismissing his application seeking his acquittal on the ground that sanction granted for his prosecution is invalid.

(2.) The petitioner, who is working as Superintending Engineer with effect from 1.8.2005 is alleged to have demanded and paid illegal gratification of Rs.20,000/ - for allowing the complainant the use of KEIL make un -approved controller in the work being undertaken by a private contractor at Airport Chowk, Chandigarh. Information being shared with the C.B.I., a trap was laid and the petitioner was caught red handed while demanding and accepting bribe of Rs.20,000/ - from Subhash Bajaj, complainant, in the presence of independent witnesses. After completion of investigation and on receipt of sanction for prosecution, charge -sheet dated 30.11.2006 is filed in the Court of Special Judge, Chandigarh, against the petitioner. The petitioner moved an application before the Special Judge on 15.5.2007 for his acquittal on the ground that sanction granted in this case for prosecution of the petitioner is invalid for various reasons.

(3.) Though starting with plea of invalid sanction, the counsel ultimately confined his submission only to invalid authentication of the order granting sanction. It is pleaded that the order granting sanction is issued by Secretary, Engineering on behalf of the Administration, U.T., Chandigarh, whereas the petitioner was working under the control of Home Secretary and not the Secretary, Engineering and, thus, the order is not valid. Of course, this submission is strongly opposed by the counsel appearing for respondent CBI.