STATE OF J&K Vs. SONAULLAH AHANGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only question involved in this petition under Section 561 -A of the Code of Criminal Procedure is the ambit and scope of the criminal court exercising jurisdiction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006 to take cognizance of the offence against a person who has not been sent up for trial by the prosecution and the court cannot proceed against him for want of sanction to his prosecution. The question has arisen because the Special Judge Anti Corruption, Kashmir vide order dated: 30.03.2000 directed the prosecution to place the material identified by it before the authority competent to grant sanction for prosecution under Section 6 of the Act and inform the court of the decision of the said authority.

(2.) THE prosecution admittedly placed the order of the court before the Chief Minister who directed the Vigilance Organisation to re -examine the entire case with special reference to the involvement of Shri G.M.Wani, the then Deputy Commissioner. After the court was informed about the steps taken by the competent authority to comply the direction the learned Special Judge passed another order dated: 02.08.2000 which is impugned in this petition on the ground that the trial court has made certain disparaging remarks which were not justified in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) THE contention of Mr.Ishtiaq Hussain, Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the trial court has wrongly interpreted the expression "re -examination" of the case as a direction for re -investigate. The re -examination of the case according to the learned counsel has been directed only with reference to Shri G.M.Wani pursuant to the direction of the court. He produced the file in which Chief Minister has observed that "the verdict of special Judge should not be dismissed so lightly". This observation was made because Vigilance Organisation had reiterated its earlier view that no case is made out against Shri G.M.Wani.