IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39495 of 2009 DR.BIKAS CHANDRA KUMAR @ VIKASH CHANDRA KUMAR, son of Late Sadhu Sharan Yadav, village Lakhawar, PS Ghosi, district Jehanabad, the then Dy. Director (Computer), Department of Science & Technology, Bihar, Patna, residing at above the Market of Mr. Pramod Kumar Yadav, Mohanpur, Punaichak, PS Shastrinagar, District Patna – petitioner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR THRU.VIG. ----------- 4 24.2.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner who is the Project Director in the Planetarium at Patna seeks quashing of the orders, dated 1.5.2008 and 26.5.2008 passed by the Special Judge Vigilance I, Patna. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner has transpired in the confessional statement of co- accused Ramesh Kumar. It is said that the order of cognizance is bad as the order of sanction has not been passed by appropriate authority. Section 19(4) of the Prevention of Corruption Act envisages that the court should not stay the proceeding on the ground of any error, omission or irregularity in the sanction granted by the authorities unless it is satisfied that such error, omission or irregularity may result in failure of justice. The definition of irregularity has been given in the explanation which specifies that the error includes competency of the authority to grant sanction. This aspect of the matter i.e. grant of sanction by any authority can be rectified by the Vigilance Department and I do not think it as a ground for quashing of the impugned order. As far as merit of the application is concerned, it 2 appears from the charge sheet that there is sufficient material to come to a conclusion that prima facie case is made out against the petitioner. This application is dismissed. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)