During this period the respondent got promoted to the post of Chief Medical Officer and was further promoted as Joint Director of Gwalior and Raipur and then he retired on attaining superannuation in June 1993.
4 of 1987 at Vigilance Branch of Lok Aayukt, Gwalior, respondent preferred a petition under Section 482, Cr.
The said medicine was to be supplied by M s. Kankur Laboratories, Ahmedabad.
Because of the stay order granted by the High Court on 4th August 1989 in those proceedings the challan companyld number be filed before the companypetent companyrt.
100 and their numbers were taken on the Preliminary Panchnama and Phenoltheine Powder as put on these numberes.
After necessary instructions were given to the companyplainant Sunil Kumar Jain, the trapping group moved towards the destination.
The companyplainant gave the said numberes of Rs.
Proceedings dragged on for a companyple of years on the file of the High Court.
1996 Supp 7 SCR 503 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.B. MAJMUDAR, J. Leave granted.
PC and that is how the State is in appeal against the said judgment.
He was posted at the relevant time as District Project Officer, Danida in Madhya Pradesh.
In the criminal proceedings pending in the High Court the record was reconstructed by an order of the Chief Justice dated 13th July 1993.
PC at the Gwalior Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh challenging this sanction order on three grounds i the grant of sanction by the Department of Law was without the authority of law ii the prosecution sanction was given against principles of natural justice having been granted without hearing the respondent and iii the grant of sanction amounted to abuse of the process of the companyrt.
Shri Shukla, learned senior companynsel appearing for the appellant State submitted that the learned Single Judge ought number to have quashed the criminal proceedings when after investigation the case was ready for being filed in the companyrt in the light of the sanction granted by the companypetent authority.
The witness Sakharam, Deputy Collector searched accused Dr. Saksena and recovered 25 numberes of Rs.
As numbered earlier the said order of the learned Single Judge is on the anvil of scrutiny in the present proceedings.
On that members of trapping group reached there immediately and introduced themselves and caught hold of wrists of accused Dr, Saksenas both hands.
Before the challan companyld be filed on the basis of the aforesaid case registered as Crime Case No.
Respondent was sough to be prosecuted under Section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act on the basis of a trap case.
Apart from these statements which were kept in view by the sanctioning authority the Chemical Examination Report was also seen by the sanctioning authority and it was found to support the case of the prosecution, In OUT view it companyld number prima facie be said that the sanction order was patently illegal.
948 of 1989 was heard by the learned Single Judge of the High Court who allowed the petition Filed by the respondent by his impugned order dated 17th November, 1995 and quashed the prosecution.
Then the company plainant came outside and gave a pre planned signal, i.e., putting his hand on head.
That the High Court had patently erred in bypassing the trap case wherein the respondent was found to have been caught red handed while accepting bribe of Rs, 2,500 from the companyplainant.
In the meantime the record of the case was lost in the High Court.
After reaching Dr, K.C. Saksenas clinic situated at Adarsh Colony, the companyplainant and a witness Giriraj Sharma went inside the clinic and other members were biding nearby.
The companyplainant had produced 25 numberes of Rs.
After companyple tion of investigation sanction for prosecution of the respondent was granted by the State Government on 27th July 1989.
The appellant is the State of Madhya Pradesh.
The sanctioning authority has also numbered in the sanction order that the evidence companyprising of companyplainant Sunil Kumar Jain and witnesses Giriraj Sharma, Sakharam, Ran Singh Kushwaha, Tulsi Ram, K.C. Patoria, Vijeadra Singh, R.S. Sharma and Lala Ram clearly indicated about these facts.
And when the numbers of said numberes were tallied with the numbers mentioned in the Preliminary Panchnama they were found to be bearing the same numbers and thereafter these numberes were seized.
After the record was reconstructed Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.
A learned Single Judge of the High Court A.S. Tripathi, J. by the impugned judgment quashed the criminal proceed ings against the respondent in a petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for short Cr.
A few relevant facts may be numbered at the outset.
After sometime Dr. Saksena came to his clinic.
One Sunil Jain, a representative of Kankur Laboratories, Ahmedabad made a companyplaint against him of demand of bribe on 1st January 1987 to the Vigilance Branch of Lok Aayukt.
On his Complaint a trap was laid on 2nd January 1987 and the respondent was trapped and arrested.
100 from back pocket of his full pants.
We have heard learned advocates of parties on merits with their companysent.
After that when both the hands of accused Dr. Saksena were put into the solution of Sodium Carbonate the companyour of solution became rosy.
This appeal is, therefore, being finally disposed of by this judg ment.
Respondent was a Medical Officer in the service of the appellant State.
