State vs K.H. Gopinath

A.N. Venugopal Gowda, J.—Assailing an order of discharge passed by the learned Trial Judge, prosecution has filed this criminal revision petition. Sri. Shankar P. Hegde Learned Counsel for the respondent filed a memo and submitted that this petition does not survive for consideration in view of the petitioner submitting the charge-sheet based on a fresh sanction order obtained, i.e., after passing of the impugned order.

Heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the record. Petitioner prosecuted the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. At the stage of framing charge, considering the objection raised by the accused and finding that the sanction order produced has not been issued by the competent authority, the learned Trial Judge passed the impugned order. However, prosecution was set at liberty to obtain sanction order from the competent authority and proceed in the matter.

In pursuance of the impugned order, the petitioner having approached the concerned authority, sanction for prosecution having been accorded, charge-sheet was filed which has been registered as C.C. No. 109/2012.

Keeping in view the said subsequent event, the grievance of the petitioner does not survive for consideration and this petition has rendered itself unnecessary. In the said view of the matter, this petition is disposed of as not surviving for consideration. The contentions raised in the matter are left open for consideration. The petitioner is at liberty to proceed with the matter in C.C. No. 109/2012. The learned Trial Judge to consider the matter in accordance with law.