Rekha Palli, J.

This batch of four petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by two senior officers of the Indian Railways. Crl.M.C. No.3137/2017 and Crl.M.C. No.3141/2017 assail identical but separate sanction orders dated 14.03.2017 passed by the Minister of Railways, granting approval for the petitioners' prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “PC Act”) as also the consequential order dated 01.07.2017 passed by the learned Trial Court taking cognizance against them. Crl.M.C. No.5094/2017 and Crl.M.C. No.5095/2017 impugn the order dated 08.05.2017, whereby the learned Trial Court has rejected the petitioners' application seeking a direction to the Sanctioning Authority to refer the matter regarding grant of sanction for their prosecution to the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India (hereinafter referred to as “DoPT”) for a final decision, in compliance of the DoPT's OMs dated 15/17.10.1986, 06.11.2006 and 20.12.2006. For the sake of convenience, only the facts of Crl.M.C. No.3137/2017 are being referred to hereinbelow.

2. The petitioner who is a senior government official working with the Indian Railways, was holding the post of Chief Commercial Manager (Catering), Northern Railways (hereinafter referred to as “CCM (Catering)”) w.e.f. 25/26.05.2014 against Leave Vacancy. Based on a joint surprise check conducted on 22.08.2014 by the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as “CBI”) in Rajdhani and Shatabdi Trains, a FIR bearing no. RC-DAI-2015-A0032 was registered u/s 120B r/w section 420 of the IPC and section 13(2) r/w section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act against the petitioners and various other private caterers. Immediately after the registration of the FIR on 14.10.2015, the petitioners were suspended from service w.e.f. 16.10.2015.

3. As per the allegations in the FIR, various licensee caterers appointed by the Indian Railways had been violating the mandatory terms and conditions of the license agreement executed between them and the Indian Railways for the supply of meals and Packaged Drinking Water (hereinafter referred to as “PDW”) to passengers. It is alleged that instead of providing Rail Neer, the own brand of the Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation (hereinafter referred to as “IRCTC”), the licensee caterers were supplying other brands of PDW to the passengers, thereby causing huge losses to the Indian Railways and corresponding gains to themselves. The specific role attributed to the petitioners is that, despite being aware of the default on the part of the licensee caterers, they did not take punitive action against them and, on the other hand, continued to release payments to them even though they had breached the terms of the license agreement.

4. After completing its investigation, the CBI, on 16.12.2015, filed a charge-sheet against the petitioners before the learned Trial Court and simultaneously sent a letter to the Ministry of Railways seeking sanction for their prosecution. Later on, upon a specific request, a copy of the charge-sheet was also forwarded by the CBI to the Ministry of Railways vide its letter dated 07/08.01.2016.

5. It is the common ground of the parties that no formal complaint of any wrongful losses was ever lodged by the Ministry of Railways. In fact, even after receiving the CBI's report and a copy of the charge-sheet, the Review Committee of the Ministry of Railways decided not to continue with the further suspension of the petitioners and on 08.10.2016, specifically observed that the matter had been referred to the Central Vigilance Commission (hereinafter referred to as “CVC”) for its advice, with the recommendation that the case was not fit for prosecution in any court of law or even for Regular Departmental Action (hereinafter referred to as “RDA”). The aforesaid reference was noted to have been made with the specific approval of the Railway Boar