IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.1027 of 2009 DATE: 15.02.2011 Between: Mohd. Yakub Ali …… Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Special Public Prosecutor for ACB …..Respondent HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.1027 of 2009 ORDER : The petitioner who worked as District Co-operative Officer, is accused of offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e)/13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in C.C. No.45 of 2007 on the file of Principal Special Judge for S.P.E and A.C.B cases, Hyderabad. According to the prosecution, the petitioner has been in possession of assets which are disproportionate to his known sources of income, in as much as the petitioner was found in possession of assets worth Rs.30,47,681/- in the shape of movable and immovable properties in the names of himself and his family members during the check period from 11.09.1978 (date of entry into service) to 30.05.2005 (date of searches conducted) as against total income of Rs.27,87,106/- and total expenditure of Rs.17,32,694/- during the check period. Thus, the prosecution arrived at value of disproportionate assets in possession of the accused as Rs.19,93,269/-. 2) It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that sanction for prosecution given by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in G.O.Ms.No.130, dated 21.06.2007 of Agriculture & Co-operation (Vig.III) Department is not in accordance with law as it was passed without applying mind on the material placed before the Government. Main grievance of the petitioner is that income from agriculture was not taken into account by the Government as well as by the prosecution. It is contended that as per declaration given by the petitioner and as per certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Wardhannapet Mandal of Warangal District, the petitioner’s joint family owns Ac.13.27 cents of wet as well as dry land in total, out of which the petitioner derived income towards his share. In the annexure appended to G.O.Ms.No.130, though house properties and agricultural properties are shown, neither their value was included in determining value of assets or disproportionate assets held by the petitioner nor income etc., therefrom was included. As per certificate issued by the M.R.O, one Sk.Hussain is pattedar in respect of a portion of the above agricultural lands and Md.Wali Pasha is pattedar in respect of other portion of above agricultural lands. None of the agricultural lands stands in the name of the petitioner viz., Md.Yakub Ali. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that Sk.Hussain and Md.Wali Pasha are father and brother of the petitioner. It is a matter which has to be enquired into by the lower Court during trial as to whether the petitioner has got any share in the landed properties held in the names of Sk.Hussain and Md.Wali Pasha and whether the petitioner derived any income from those landed properties towards his share during the check period. The said factor is a question of fact to be decided by the trial Court after both the parties leading evidence before that Court. This Court in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot jump to any conclusion on one side or the other on this aspect. 3) In State of Karnataka V. AMeerjan[1] the Supreme Court held that sanction order must be demonstrative of the fact that there had been proper application of mind on the part of the sanctioning authority and that materials collected during investigation which could prima facie establish existence of evidence in regard to commission of offence by the public servant concerned should be available before the sanctioning authority before the order of sanction is passed. It was a decision rendered after full trial. Supreme Court further observed therein that ordinarily before passing an order of sanction, the entire records containing the materials collected against the accused should be placed before the sanctioning authority and that in the event the order of sanction does not indicate application of mind as to the materials placed before the said authority before the order of sanction was passed, the same may be produced before the Court to show that such materials had in fact been produced. Therefore, again it is a question of fact to be decided by the trial Court whether all the materials collected constituting the offence were placed before the sanctioning authority and whether the sanctioning authority applied its mind before passing the order of sanction for prosecution. In that view of the matter, the said question cannot be decided in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 4) In State of M.P V. Awadh Kishore Gupta[2], the Supreme Court categorically held that the High Court cannot appreciate evidence while exercising its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C to conclude whether materials produced are sufficient or not for convicting the accused in a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act. I n R.Sundara Rajan V. State[3] the Supreme Court observed as follows: “14. In this connection, it may be mentioned that we cannot look into the adequacy or inadequacy of the material before the sanctioning authority and we cannot sit as a Court of appeal over the sanction order. The order granting sanction shows that all the available materials were placed before the sanctioning authority who considered the same at great details. Only because some of the said materials could not be proved, the same by itself, in our opinion, would not vitiate the order of sanction.” Thus, it becomes premature for this Court to decide sufficiency of evidence as well as validity of the sanction order in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Thus, there are no valid or legal grounds for quashing the proceedings pending in the lower Court. 5) In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J February 15, 2011 ksh [1] (2007)11 Supreme Court Cases 273 [2] AIR 2004 Supreme Court 517 [3] (2007)2 Supreme Court Cases (Crl.) 563