J.B. Pardiwala, J.

1. Since the issues involved in both the captioned applications are the same and the challenge is also to the selfsame criminal proceedings, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2. By these two applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants - original accused persons have prayed for the following reliefs:

"5A. That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to admit and allow this petition.

B. That this Honourable Court be pleased to quash the proceedings of Special Case No. CBI-SPCC/59/2010 pending in the Court of Special Judge, CBI Court, Mirzapur, Ahmedabad, on the basis of the charge-sheet filed under section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, pursuant to the second complaint bearing No. RC 06(A)/09 with CBI, ACB, Gandhinagar, after the prosecution pursuant to the first complaint bearing RC EOU-1-2008-E-001, which was registered under Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Sections 467, 420, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code came to be dropped against the accused No. 1 who happens to be the son of the petitioner.

C. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the CBI to obtain the documents to the assets and income and Fix Deposits of the petitioner which are at present in the custody of the Trial Court and return them back to the petitioner along with other documents which are lying in the custody of the CBI which have not been submitted before the Trial Court. This Hon'ble Court may also be pleased to order to de-freezing of the back accounts. Demat accounts and share trading accounts of the petitioner in the interests of justice.

D. Pending admission and or final disposal of this petition this Honourable Court be pleased to stay of the further proceedings of Special Case No. CBI-SPCC/59/2010 pending in the Court of Special Judge, CBI Court, Mirzapur, Ahmedabad.

E. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant such other and further relief as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

F. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to award cost of this petition."

3. It appears from the materials on record that the C.B.I. received an information that one Shri Hitesh H. Mehta, serving as a Inspector of Central Excise and Customs, Vapi Commissionerate, District: Valsad had amassed assets disproportionate to his known source of income. Shri Mehta is alleged to have amassed assets disproportionate to his known source of income during the period between 1st January 2002 and 21st August 2008. During the search conducted by the C.B.I., in connection with the investigation of one another case bearing No. RC EOW-1-2008-E-001 at New Delhi, many incriminating documents with regard to the investment in assets both movable and immovable by Shri Mehta were recovered.

4. The applicant of the Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 19779 of 2015 is the mother of Shri Mehta and the applicant of the connected application is the estranged wife of Shri Mehta.

5. The C.B.I. lodged the First Information Report in this regard for the offence punishable under Sections 13(1)(e) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code. The First Information Report lodged by the C.B.I., ultimately, culminated in filing of the charge-sheet in the Court of the learned Special Judge, C.B.I. Court No. 4, Mirzapur at Ahmedabad. The filing of the charge-sheet culminated in the Special C.B.I. Case No. 59 of 2010. The allegations against Smt. Mita H. Mehta alias Smt. Mita G. Raval, wife of the main accused i.e. the public servant is as under:

"That Smt Mita H. Mehta @ Smt. Mita G. Raval filed income tax returns showing income from various sources like tuitions, beauty parlour work, share trading and job in private sector, Shri Rizwan R. Sheikh of R.R. Consultancy, Valsad was examined. He proved that Smt. Mita G. Raval in fact did not work at R.R. Consultanc