%^l HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPLICAMT Accused BON-APPUCANTS/ Complaiaanfcs VERSUS 1. 2. 3. 0-. M.P. No.640/2009 AbhitabhDas S/o Nand Gopaldas, aged 52 years R/o B-l Type, House No. 144 Urja Nagar Colony S.E.C.L. Gewara, District Korba (C.G.). C.B.I. fhrough Supermtendent of PoUce, Central Invest^ation Bureau, Jabalpur (M.P.) Inspector, A.C.B., C.B.I. Jabalpur (M.P.). Payarelal Gosai S/o late Shri Ghashiram, R/o M.-729, Adarsh Nagar, Kushmiinda Colouy, District -Korba (C.G.). •n APPUCATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODB OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. 1973. (8B :Hon'ble Mr. T.P.Shairma.J.) Present:- Shri Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate for the applicant/petitioner. Ms. Pouzia Mirza, Assistant Solicitor General for the Union of Indian/ respondents N0. 1 & 2. QRAL- ORDBR (Passedon 04/12/2009) 1. This is a petition under Section 482 of fhe Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (iu short the Code) for quashiaent of fhe cruninal proceediug pendiug before the Special Judge, (C.B.I.), Raipiir in Special Case No. 1/08 forthe offence punishable underSections 7, 13(1) (D), 13 (2) offhe Ftevention of Con-uption Act, 1988, 2. Quashnient is prayed on fhe grouad that without any sufficient niaterial for takiag cogmzaace of fhe offenee court below has takert cognizance and has fi^ained the charges. 3. Leamed counsel for fhe petitioner vehemenfly at^ued that C.B.I. has filed Uie charge sheet agamst fhe petitioner for the offence puuishable under Sections 7, 13(1) (D), 13 (2) of the Preventiou of Corruption Act; 1988 '\ \. •-f _; against the petitioner charge sheet does not reveals priaia facie inaterial suf&cient for takiug cogaizance of the offence agaiusf the petitioner. Accordiag to the case of C.B.I. all investigation has becn coiupleted on '2,0 f 6)07 wtuch appears impossible. 4. On the other haads, learued cotmsel for the respqndeuts N0. 1 &2 opposed fhe petition. 5. On due consideration ttie copy of fhe chai^e-sheet it appears that aUegation inade in the chat^e sheet is pnm.a facie suf&cicnt for taknig cognizaace aad fi-aming of fhe charge agauist fhe petitioner aad if aUegation inade in fhe cliarge sheet is adnutted in. its fa.ee value and even its evidencarv value then same would be suf&eient for conviction offhe petitioner therefore, I do not find aay scope for iaterfereuce ia exercise of extraordinary uiherent jurisdiction, Consequenfly, this petition is liable to be dismissed aud it is hereby dismissed. Sd/- TP.Sharma Judge