JAI SHANKAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 24.05.2014, by which application submitted by the petitioner challenging the order for grant of sanction for prosecution was dismissed and simultaneously charges were framed for offence under Section 120B IPC read with Section 7 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short "the Act of 1988").

(2.) Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was a Sepoy in the Army having no connection with the Railways or its working. He was not in a position to arrange appointment of others in the railways. In view of the above, Section 7 of the Act of 1988 does not apply so as to frame charges for offence under the said provision. The petitioner has been implicated when trap was conducted where two persons were caught. The petitioner was said to be instrument to get appointment of others in the railways but then no material exists to connect him with the crime. The offence against the petitioner is in reference to telephonic conversation with Narayan Ram but expert opinion does not exist to show voice of the petitioner therein for demand of money for appointment. In absence of it, the prosecution could not bring evidence or prima facie case against the petitioner.

(3.) It is also stated that sanction for prosecution has been given without application of mind. The sanction for prosecution has been granted against two accused, out of which, one is petitioner and other is Arvind. The order for both of them is same though appointing authorities of Arvind and present petitioner are different. It becomes a case of non-application of mind while granting sanction for prosecution. In view of the above, impugned order dismissing the application of the petitioner for challenge to the order of sanction for prosecution, so as framing charges, deserves to be set aside.