The demand and offer of bribe are essential for charging an accused under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and intercepted conversations used as evidence must adhere to the mandated procedures.

Jasmeet Singh, J. (Oral)

1. CRL. MC. 1148/2022 is seeking setting aside of the impugned order dated 01.06.2012 passed by the learned Special Judge (CBI), Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in CC No. 11/2012 (New No.09 of 2017 and CC No. 384 of 2019) titled `CBI vs. Dr. Ketan Desai & Ors.' being Case No. RC 02(A)/2010/CBI/ACU-IX/New Delhi.

2. As per the impugned order, the petitioners have been charged under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The relevant portion of the Impugned Order reads as under:

"CHARGE

I, Swarana Kanta Sharma, Special Judge, CBI-05, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi do herewith charge you accused:

Dr. Sukhvinder Singh, S/o Sardar Kartar Singh, R/o Kothi no. 1905, Sector 64, Mohali, (Punjab) as under:

That you during the period November 2009 to April 2010 while working as Vice Chairman, Gian Sagar Educational & Charitable Trust, Mohali, Punjab contacted your co-accused Sh. Jatinder Pal Singh to obtain clearance from Medical Council of India for Gian Sagar Medical College & Hospital, Patiala for admission of 4th Batch of MBBS students for the academic session 2010-2011, who assured you to help and further you arranged Rs. Two crores with the help of Sh. Nirmal Singh Bhangoo to be given as illegal gratification to your co-accused Dr. Ketan Desai, a public servant and abetted to accept illegal gratification for a motive or reward of giving a favourable compliance inspection report and thereby you committed an offence u/s 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and within my cognizance

And I hereby direct that you be tried on the aforesaid charge by this court.

CHARGE

I, Swarana Kanta Sharma, Special Judge, CBI-05, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi do herewith charge you accused:

Dr. Kamaljeet Singh, S/o Sh, Avtar Singh, R/o House no. 3003, Phase II, Arban Estate, Patiala (Punjab)/Village Jaffar Nagar, PO Janhirian, Tehsil Patiala, District Patiala, Punjab as under:

That you during the period November 2009 to April 2010 while working as Chief Executive Officer, Gian Sagar Medical College & Hospital, Patiala collected the amount of Rs. Two crores from your co-accused Sh. K.A. Paul as directed by your co-accused Dr. Sukhvinder Singh at Delhi and further delivered it to your co-accused Sh. Jatinder Pal Singh at his residence at Delhi, which further was meant to be given to your co-accused Dr. Ketan Desai as illegal gratification for giving a favourable compliance inspection report and thereby you committed an offence u/s 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and within my cognizance.

And I hereby direct that you be tried on the aforesaid charge by this court."

3. The basis for framing the charge as per the Impugned Order is:

"13. The investigation also revealed that accused Sukhvinder Singh had arranged Rs. 2 crore as illegal gratification with the help of accused N.S. Bhangoo, father of Sh. Harvinder Singh, Chairman of Gian Sagar Educational and Charitable Trust, Mohali under whose aegis Gian Sagar Educational and Charitable trust, Mohali is run."

4. A perusal of the aforesaid shows that it is alleged that the petitioners had arranged Rs. 2 crores to be given to Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh (middleman) to be given to Dr. Ketan Desai, the President of Medical Council of India (MCI).

5. The reason for this illegal gratification was that NoC was required from MCI for admission to 4th year MBBS course at Gian Sagar Medical College and Hospital, Patiala (hereinafter referred to as "GSMCH").

6. Mr. Hariharan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner states that in the present case, Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, the person to whom the money was given for giving it further has been discharged by this Court. Dr. Ketan Desai, the then President of MCI who was to receive the bribe has been discharged for want of sanction by an order dated 12.12.2018 passed by this Court. Both the orders have not been challenged by the respondent and hence, have attained finality. In addition, there is also no sanction for the approver Suresh