S. Pulikesi vs CBI, Kochi

Justice S.S. Satheesachandran

APPENDIX

PETITIONER''S ANNEXURES :

ANNEXURE I :

COPY OF THE CHARGE SUPPLIED TO THIS PETITIONER.

ANNEXURE II :

A COPY OF LETTER NO.D10-28267/02 DATED 19.2.2004.

ANNEXURE III :

A PHOTOCOPY OF THE ANALYTICAL REPORT PREPARED BY THE MEDICAL CO-ORDINATOR DATED 27.7.04.

ANNEXURE IV :

A COPY OF FAX MESSAGES RECEIVED FROM THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES.

ANNEXURE V :

A PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES DATED 15.7.03.

ANNEXURE VI :

A PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES IN 300TH BOARD MEETING HELD ON 18.10.2004.

ANNEXURE VII :

A LETTER RECEIVED FROM DRUGS CONTROLLER, City place TRIVANDRUM DATED 22.2.10.

ANNEXURE VIII :

A COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 298TH BOARD MEETING HELD ON 6.8.04.

ANNEXURE IX :

A COPY OF MINUTES OF THE 299TH BOARD MEETING HELD ON 23.9.04.

ANNEXURE X :

A PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTE DATED 13.8.2004.

ANNEXURE XI :

A PHOTOCOPY OF THE PURCHASE ORDER.

ANNEXURE XII :

A PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING.

RESPONDENTS'' ANNEXURES :

NIL.

Petitioner is one among the accused, A1, in a pending case numbered as C.C.No.10/2009 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court (C.B.I., Special Court), Ernakulam. He has filed the above petition to quash Annexure I charge filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation, for short the ''C.B.I.'', on which cognizance of offences u/s 120(B) read with 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, for short the ''P.C Act'', has been taken against him. Though various grounds are canvassed by the petitioner to assail the criminal proceedings launched against him in the aforesaid case the main thrust of attack that pressed into service by the learned counsel revolves round the question of sanction for his prosecution. To prosecute him for the aforesaid offences, as his services had been lend to an undertaking of the State Government sanction from that Government was required, but, that has not been obtained and produced in the case, is the submission of the counsel. That challenge is resisted by the learned Standing Counsel for the C.B.I. contending for offences covered by the P.C. Act, sanction for prosecution of petitioner, who belongs to All India Service, as envisaged u/s 19(1)(c) of that Act, has been obtained from the Central Government and produced before the court with the final report. In relation to the penal offences imputed against him no sanction u/s 197 of the Code as such is required since the offences imputed against him by no stretch of imagination could be treated as having any nexus with the discharge or purported discharge of his official duties, according to the Standing counsel. In the present petition which has been filed u/s 482 of the Code, this court cannot be called upon to consider questions involving disputed facts with reference to the materials tendered in the case along with the final report, to examine whether sanction u/s 197 of the Code is required for prosecution of the petitioner/first accused in the case. If at all, the petitioner has such a challenge against his prosecution he can, no doubt, canvass it before the Additional Special Judge before whom the case awaits trial. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, canvassed for issuing a direction to the special Judge to have an expeditious trial and disposal of the case. Having regard to the pendency of cases before his court, learned Special Judge shall consider the feasibility of giving the case priority for its disposal at an early date. Subject to the observations made above and reserving the right of the petitioner to canvass his challenges, if any, on the question of sanction for his prosecution, the petition is dismissed.