JUDGMENT

Sethi, J.-In all these appeals, the FIRs and subsequent proceedings pending against the respondents under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 1988 Act ) were quashed by the High Court in exercise of the powers vesting in it under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The accused-respondents had been apprehended while accepting the bribe by laying the trap under the 1988 Act. The High Court found that as the investigations had not been conducted by the authorised officers under the 1988 Act, the same were vitiated and deserved to be quashed.

2. The questions of law to be adjudicated upon in these appeals are:

(1) Whether the notifications issued by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred upon it under Section 5A(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (since repealed) empowering and authorising Inspector of Police to investigate the cases registered under the said Act are not saved under the saving provisions of the re-enacted Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(2) Whether the aforesaid notifications not being inconsistent with the provisions of the re-en