The determination of any miscarriage of justice caused by the sanction could only be made at the stage of judgment by the Trial Court.

ANU MALHOTRA, J.

1. The petitioner Gopal Singh Bisht S/o Inder Singh Bisht arrayed as accused A-10, in the charge sheet filed by the respondents to the present petition i.e., the Central Bureau of Investigation, Special Crime Region-III, New Delhi, in Charge-sheet No.13 dated 25.8.2008 in relation to the FIR No. RC- 12(S)/2006/SCR-III, New Delhi for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 120-B r/w 420, 468 & 471 IPC r/w Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of PC Act, 1988 and substantive offences under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of PC Act, 1988 (as it then existed) and who vide order dated 25.1.2016 of the Special Judge (CBI-01), CBI (North -West), Rohini, in CBI case No. 57/2008 prima facie was held to have committed offences punishable under Section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, Section13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 13(1)(d)(ii) and 13(1)(d)(iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and other penal offences as mentioned in the charge sheet with the aid of Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and who vide the charge framed on 15.4.2016 was charged to the following effect:

“That during the year 2002 at Delhi, a criminal conspiracy was hatched with an object to fraudulently to revive Railway Line CGHS Ltd, (Registration No. 121/H), a defunct/dormant Society by submitting the forged and fabricated documents and to get sent a list of 116 members (most of them were fake) to DDA to obtain land in the name of Society at subsidized rates. You were also one of the members of the said conspiracy not only succeeded in revival of the Society on the basis of fake and fabricated documents but also succeeded in getting land i.e. plot bearing Plot No. 11, Sector-19B, Dwarka, New Delhi in the name of Society.

That in pursuance of said criminal conspiracy, you being the dealings(sic.) assistant had (sic)taken on record the forged letter dated 15.05.80 wherein the Society allegedly intimated regarding the resignation and enroll (l) ment(sic) of the members from time to time and the letter dated 20.06.1986 wherein the society allegedly intimated the change of its address from Subzi Mandi Railway Station to 21A, Gail No. 6B, Molarband Extension, Badarpur, New Delhi despite the fact that there was no reference of any such letter in the noting portion of the society file.

Further in your note dated 05.12.2002, you mentioned that you had taken the signature of R.K. Sharma, Honorary Secretary of the Society, who allegedly produced the record of the society before you whereas R.K. Sharma was found (to be a (sic)) fictitious person and the alleged record was produced by your co-accused Sri Chand before you.

Thereafter you put up a detail (ed) note on 09.12.2002, on the basis of which a freeze list of 116 members was approved by the RCS.

You being the dealing assistant of RCS abused your official position for obtaining valuable thing or pecuniary gain for yourself or for any other person and you also acted without any public interest by taking the above list unauthorisedly on record and certifying that R.K. Sharma produced the record before you and putting up a favourable note dated 09.12.2002 and you thereby committed offences punishable under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d)(ii) & 13(1)(d) (iii) of PC Act, 1988 within my cognizance and thereby direct you be tried by this court for the above said offence.”,

and who pleaded not guilty thereto and claimed trial— vide the present petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 has sought the quashing of the entire criminal proceedings in the FIR No. RC-12 (S)/2006/SCRIII, New Delhi which was registered on 23.10.2006.

2. The petitioner contends that in the instant case sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 had been accorded and that no requisite sanction in terms of Section 197 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 having been accorded for the offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code, the charges levelled against the petitioner c