JUDGMENT

S. Ravindra Bhat, J.—The question which arises for consideration in this revision petition is whether the learned Special Judge took cognizance of the case on 13.7.2005. The impugned order held in the negative and turned down an application by the petitioner accused.

2. According to the allegations levelled, the petitioner, a Drug Inspector, had visited the wholesale chemist shop of the complainant and noticed some deficiencies which led to preparation of a memo, listing those deficiencies. It was alleged that the petitioner demanded Rs.5,000 as a bribe. On the basis of the complaint made subsequently, it was alleged that the complainant contacted the petitioner again and a conversation between the two was recorded. It was further alleged that at the behest of the petitioner, money was handed over to one Sh. Sanjeev Garg, which was later recovered. The petitioner was arrested and thereafter admitted to regular bail on 13.5.2005 when the Court required him not to leave Delhi. This condition was modified on 13.7.2005 when the Court permitted the petitioner to leave Delhi after intimating the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.). On the date, i.e. 13.7.2005, the petitione