Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the intervenors and learned Public Prosecutor at length.

2. By this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., the applicant seeks bail. Bail application bearing No.208/2011 filed by the applicant has been rejected by the Sessions Judge, Panaji by order dated 6.8.2011. The applicant is presently in police custody.

3. Pursuant to the order dated 7.5.2011 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 32/2011 by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pernem in an application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. filed by the intervenors FIR was registered against the applicant and others for the offences punishable under Sections 217, 218, 405, 409, 420. 468, 471, 120-B and Section 34 of I.P.C. Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Sections 17-A and 17-B of the Town and Country Planning Act and Rule 7 of the Goa (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage of Minerals) Rules, 2004, The Forest Act, The Water Act and the Environment Act. The applicant filed an application seeking relief under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. before the Sessions Judge, North Goa, at Panaji, which was dismissed by the Sessions Judge by order dated 4.8.2011. Thereafter, applicant filed an application for bail bearing No.208/2011 seeking bail which was dismissed by the Sessions Court. The applicant has approached this Court for bail.

4. Mr. Pangam, in support of the application submitted that no prima facie case has been made out against the applicant under Sections 217, 218. 405. 409, 420. 468. 471, 120(b) and Section 34 of I.P.C. He further submitted that no prima facie case has been made out against the applicant under any of the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He further submitted that FIR does not disclose any offence having been committed under Section 17-A of the Town and Country Planning Act and Rule 7 of the Goa (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage of Minerals) Rules, 2004 or Rules framed thereunder.

According to Mr. Pangam, FIR itself discloses that the applicant has not committed the offence as a public servant as such none of the Sections under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are attracted against the applicant. Learned Counsel further submitted that there is absolutely no material available with the investigating agency to establish even prima facie the offence under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Learned Counsel further submitted that under Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development Regulation) Act, 1957 the punishment prescribed is two years imprisonment or with fine which may extend to Rs.25,000/- or with both and as such the said offence is bailable. Learned Counsel further submitted that under Rule 7 of the Goa (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage of Minerals) Rules, 2004 the maximum punishment is for a tern1 of one year or with fine which may extend to Rs.5000/- or with both and as such offence is bailable. Learned Counsel further submitted that the investigation undertaken by investigating agency is without jurisdiction inasmuch as learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to direct registration of FIR under Prevention of Corruption Act, since it is only the Special Juage under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 who can direct registration of FIR. Mr. Pangam, further submitted that learned JMFC, Pernem could have directed only an officer in charge of the police station within her jurisdiction to register the FIR against the accused and no direction could have been issued to C.I.D. Crime Branch, Panaji. Learned Counsel further submitted that registration of FIR against the applicant is patently illegal and as such investigation carried out pursuant to the said FIR is also illegal. Mr. Pangam, further submitted that major offences alleged against the applicant in the FIR me not made out even prima facie against the applicant. Mr. Pangam, further submitted that