JUDGMENT :

1. In this criminal application, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenge is to the order dated 15.01.2020 passed by the learned Special Judge, Akola, whereby the learned Special Judge rejected the application made by the applicant/accused for his discharge in Special ACB Case No.01/2013.

2. Background facts:-

The non-applicant No.2 is the informant. On his report lodged at Ramdaspeth Police Station Akola crime bearing No.3024/2007 under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was registered against the accused. It is the case of prosecution that non-applicant No.2, at the relevant time was working as lecturer at Mundada Jr. College, Malegao, District Washim. The college management had passed resolution to introduce a subject “Computer Science” in the college on no grant basis. The proposal needed consent and approval of the Government. The proposal was required to be sent to the Government through proper channel. Initially, it was required to be put up before the office of District Vocational Education and Training Officer Grade-1 Akola. Through the office of District Vocational Education Officer the proposal was required to be sent to Mantralaya Mumbai for final approval.

3. The accused, at the relevant time was District Vocational Education and Training Officer at Akola. The proposal was put up before the accused by non-applicant No.2 with necessary documents for approval and for issuance of no objection certificate. The accused, on 21.07.2007, issued a letter to the college and pointed out some discrepancies in the proposal. The college was called upon to rectify the discrepancies. The accused on 12.03.2007 personally visited junior college at Malegaon and discussed the issue with non-applicant No.2. After due deliberation non-applicant No.2 promised that the proposal would be put up after removing the objections. It is stated that during the discussion, the accused demanded Rs.5,000/- from non-applicant No.2 as a bribe for forwarding the proposal to the Government of Maharashtra. The accused further told non-applicant No.2 that the proposal would be rejected on a technical ground, if the amount demanded was not paid. Non-applicant No.2 initially expressed his inability to pay the amount in lump sum, but agreed to pay Rs.2,000/- on 13.03.2007 as a part payment. Non-applicant No.2 visited the office of accused and submitted the proposal with necessary documents. It is stated that non-applicant No.2 was not willing to pay the amount. He, therefore, lodged the complaint against the accused. Anti Corruption Bureau Officer thereafter by following the procedure conducted the raid and apprehended the accused while accepting the bribe amount of Rs.2,000/- on 13.03.2007. After investigation in the crime, charge sheet came to be filed. Learned Special Judge took the cognizance of the offence.

4. The accused made the application for discharge under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is his case that the allegations made against him are false. He did not demand bribe from non-applicant No.2. There is no evidence to frame the charge against him. On the false report of non-applicant No.2, the case was filed against him.

5. It is further contended that sanction for prosecution of the accused is not valid sanction. It is the case of the accused that in respect of the same prosecution earlier on three occasions, the sanction was refused by the competent authority. The order, refusing sanction on three occasions, was reviewed without any new material and without recording the reasons. The sanction obtained thus is not legal and valid. The cognizance taken by the learned Judge was not proper.

6. This application was opposed by the State. It is the contention of the State that the crime committed by the accused is serious in nature. On the basis of the complaint of non-applicant No.2 the trap was laid and accused was apprehended red handed while accep