D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 732/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR JUDGMENT Om Prakash Verma Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors. D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO. 732/2010 IN S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6035/2010 Date of Judgment : 03.12.2010 PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ARUN MISHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI Mr. C.S. Kotwani for the appellant BY THE COURT (PER HON'BLE JOSHI,J) By way of this intra court appeal, appellant Om Prakash Verma has challenged the legality and propriety of the order dated 29.09.2010 passed by the learned Single Bench, by which the writ petition filed by the appellant-petitioner has been dismissed. The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the appellant-petitioner Om Prakash Verma, who was working as Patwari, Patwar Mandal Jhambar, Tehsil Hanumangarh, District Hanumangarh, was trapped by the officers of the Anti Corruption Bureau, Hanumangarh on the information of complainant Ravi Poonia and he was caught red- Page 1 of 4 D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 732/2010 handed while accepting the bribe of Rs.500/- in the form of 5 currency notes of Rs.100/-. After usual investigation, Investigating Officer sought permission for prosecution under the relevant provisions and the District Collector, Hanumangarh vide order dated 28.04.2010 accorded sanction for prosecution for offences punishable under Section 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellant challenged the legality and propriety of the order dated 28.04.2010 by filing writ petition before the learned Single Bench of this court and the learned Single Bench dismissed the writ petition while observing that the order challenged by the appellant cannot be said to be malafide or without any foundation. Learned Single Judge further observed that the allegations and charges against the appellant-petitioner had to be decided by regular criminal court and the appellant- petitioner cannot be refused to face trial on the basis of allegations made against him and the order sanctioning the prosecution in question cannot be said to be perverse, arbitrary and illegal in any manner. Hence, this appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that on the basis of the material collected by the investigating agency, no offence under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act is made out and the appellant was falsely implicated in the criminal case under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Learned counsel Page 2 of 4 D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 732/2010 for the appellant further contended that the sanctioning authority, i.e. the District Collector, Hanumangarh did not take into consideration the papers submitted by the appellant before him while according sanction for prosecution. We have considered and pondered over the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned order passed by the learned Single Bench so also the order dated 28.04.2010 passed by District Collector, Hanumangarh, the legality and propriety of which was challenged before the learned Single Bench. The order dated 28.04.2010 contains the fact that complainant Ravi Poonia submitted a written report on 18.08.2009 alleging that the appellant demanded Rs.500/- as bribe in lieu of entry of Intkal in the Revenue records. After verification of this fact by way of taprecorder, a trap was arranged by the Police Inspector of the Anti Corruption Bureau, in which the appellant was caught red-handed while accepting the bribe of Rs.500/- and the said Rs.500/- were recovered from the pocket of the appellant. The order dated 28.04.2010 also contains the fact that on 15.02.2010, appellant Om Prakash Verma was also heard on the point of prosecution sanction. Even assuming that the papers which were produced by the appellant before the District Collector were not considered, as per the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant- Page 3 of 4 D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 732/2010 petitioner, this cannot have much bearing on the issue at this stage as the order of the District Collector, Hanumangarh dated 28.04.2010 is a speaking order and it appears that it has been passed after due application of mind and considering all the relevant facts required to be considered at this stage. This is a case of red-handed trap conducted by the officers of the Anti Corruption Bureau after verifying the facts of the complaint. Thus, in view of the discussion made above and looking to the contents of the order dated 28.04.2010 passed by District Collector, Hanumangarh, the order dated 29.09.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge cannot be said to be perverse, without any foundation or malafide one. The order passed by learned Single Judge does not suffer from any illegality, impropriety or irregularity and the same deserves to be affirmed and the appeal filed by the appellant is liable to be dismissed at the admission stage itself. Accordingly, the appeal filed by appellant Om Prakash Verma is dismissed at the admission stage with no order as to costs. [KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI],J. [ARUN MISHRA],CJ. Pramod Page 4 of 4