Evidence of witnesses had also been recorded.
The respondent accused was discharged in a criminal trial by the said order.
It was required to be shown by the accused as to how any prejudice was caused or there was failure of justice.
Background facts necessary for disposal of the appeal in a nutshell are as follows A charge sheet was filed against the respondent hereinafter referred to as the Accused for companymission of offences relatable under Sections 7, 13 1 d read with Section 13 2 of the Act.
The accused had numberobjection to it.
It was also pointed out that the order of the High Court is practically number reasoned and numberreason was assigned for accepting the view of the trial companyrt.
The High Court upheld the order of discharge passed by the Trial Court.
However, liberty was given to the prosecution to obtain fresh sanction and to file a fresh charge sheet.
Arising out of SLP Crl.
Undisputedly, the sanction was accorded by the Superintending Engineer of the Karnataka Electricity Board hereinafter referred to as the Board .
No.3615/2003 ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
At that stage the public prosecutor filed an application stating that in view of some earlier judgments of the High Court, question relating to validating a sanction for prosecution was to be adjudicated first.
State of Karnataka calls in question legality of the judgment rendered by a learned Single judge of the Karnataka High Court.
