ORDER :

1. The Criminal Petition No. 6398 of 2016 is filed by the petitioner/accused No. 5 under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 25 of 2013 on the file of the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases at Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B and 420 of Indian Penal Code (for short “I.P.C.”) and under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act (for short “P.C. Act”).

2. The Criminal Petition No. 6399 of 2016 is filed by the petitioner/accused No. 3 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 01 of 2012 on the file of the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases at Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 379, 409, 411, 420, 427, 447 and 468 of I.P.C. and under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act.

3. As the petitioner/accused is one and the same in both the cases and the allegations made and point involved is also one and the same, I find that it is expedient to decide both the petitions by common order.

4. Sri. P. Shankar Rao, MLA, Secunderabad, Cantonment and Sri. Yerram Naidu, Ex. M.P. filed W.P. Nos. 794 and 6604 of 2011 before this Court and this Court by order dated 10.08.2011 directed C.B.I. to register a crime against the petitioner and others in view of the magnitude of largesse granted in favour of other accused by the petitioner/accused being the higher official in Mines and Minerals department including huge investments as part of quid pro quo arrangement for the largesse and the petitioner and others are benefited by the investors from the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh.

5. In pursuance of the directions issued by this Court, the respondent registered crime against the petitioner and others, investigated into and filed charge-sheet before the Special Judge for trial of C.B.I. Cases, Hyderabad.

6. The main allegation made against the petitioner is that the petitioner is instrumental for granting mining lease to M/s. Raghuram Cements Ltd. (for short “RCL”) presently known as Bharathi Cement Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (BCCL) vide G.O.Ms. No. 95 dated 27.03.2006 for limestone in Yerraguntla and Kamalapuram Mandals of Kadapa District in abuse of his official position as public servant by committing criminal misconduct conniving with S. Sankarnarayana (Accused No. 8), Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy (Accused No. 1) M/s. RCL (Accused No. 3) and Sri. J.J. Reddy (Accused No. 4) and thereby committed offence punishable under Section 120-B and 420 of I.P.C. and under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act.

7. The other allegations alleged are on rejection of the renewal application for grant of prospecting license filed by M/s. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd. (GACL). The charge-sheet is running into more than 160 pages. However, the gist of the charge-sheet in C.C. No. 25 of 2013 is that the petitioner is guilty of criminal misconduct in connivance with other accused while occupying highest position in Mines and Mineral Department for unlawful benefit for himself and other accused including accused No. 1 and others and invited investments as quid pro quo from various persons in erstwhile state of Andhra Pradesh.

8. The allegations in C.C. No. 01 of 2012 are also identical. The then Government of Andhra Pradesh issued a notification under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 vide G.O.Ms. No. 467 dated 17.11.2009 extending the powers and jurisdiction of the members of Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) for registration and investigation of criminal case related to the Boundary Disputes and illegal mining activities of M/s. Obulapuram Mining Company Private Limited (M/s. OMCPL) and M/s. Bellary Iron Ore Private Limited (M/s. BIOP) in the Bellary Reserve Forest of Anantapur.

9. Subsequent to registration of the case M/s. Obulapuram Mining Company Private Limited (M/s. OMCPL) filed a writ petition No. 27120 of 2009, obtain