The present application, under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, has been preferred for quashing the criminal proceeding as well as FIR of Vigilance Police Station Case No. 38 of 2016 arising out of private Complaint Case No. 146 of 2007 filed by Nirmala Kumari against the petitioner and others vide Annexure-1.

2. The challenge is on the ground that the petitioner is a public servant and without previous sanction prosecution of the petitioner is bad in law.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer. However, concedes that in the case of Anil Kumar and Others vs. M.K. Aiyappa and Another reported in 2013(10) SCC 705, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the entertainment of complaint for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act by the Special Judge without prior sanction to prosecute is bad in law.

4. The record reveals that one Nirmala Kumari had filed Complaint Case No. 146 of 2007 against the petitioner and others for offences under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act before the Court of learned Special Judge, Muzaffarpur. The learned Vigilance Judge sent the complaint petition