JUDGMENT/ORDER

VINAY JOSHI, J. - RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties.

2. The petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 29/3/2019 passed by the Additional Session Judge, Chandrapur accepting the closure report as well as sought directions to recall the decision of the respondent no.3 Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur dtd. 4/12/2015 refusing to grant sanction and subsequent related communications.

3. It is the petitioner's case that on 25/4/2014, he has made a complaint to the respondent no. 5 Police Inspector, Anti Corruption Bureau, Wardha about the alleged demand of bribe for taking relevant mutation entry by respondent no.8, who was working as the Revenue Officer. In pursuance of said complaint, the Anti Corruption Bureau arranged trap, which was turned to be successful in which respondent no.8 was allegedly found accepting bribe of Rs.5, 000.00. After completion of investigation, papers were forwarded by respondent no.4 Director General of Anti Corruption Bureau, Mumbai to respondent no.2 Additional Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya for sanction to prosecute in terms of Sec. 19 of