Judgment

Sethi, J.—Heard. Leave granted.

2. Relying upon the judgment of this Court in State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal & Ors.1 and exercising powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh vide the judgment impugned in these appeals quashed the investigations and consequent proceedings against the respondents initiated, conducted and concluded by the police under Sections 13(1)(e) and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The Court found that for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e) of the Act the investigation had not been conducted by an authorised officer in terms of Section 17 of the Act. It was observed :

“It is of utmost importance that investigation into criminal offence must always be free from any objectionable features or infirmities which may legiti­mately lead to the grievance of the accused that the work of investi­gation is carried on unfairly and with any ulterior motive. The prosecution of the accused on the basis of investi­gation by a person who had no legal authority to investigate cannot be allowed.”

In order to appreciate the legal controversy, it