High Courts should not quash FIRs in corruption cases at the investigation stage unless no cognizable offense is disclosed, allowing for thorough investigation.

ORDER :

1. Draft amendment is allowed. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

2. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR being ACB C.R.No.I – 1 of 2016 registered with Rajkot City ACB Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 7 , 12, 13(1)(g) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the petitioner herein.

3. Brief facts of the case are as under:-

3.1 The fact of this case is that the complainant owns a second residential property adjacent to their primary residence. As this secondary property lacked an electricity connection, the complainant submitted an application to the accused's office, seeking a new connection in his father's name. In response, both accused individuals visited the complainant's residence, instructing the complainant to subsequently attend their office in person. During this meeting at the office, accused No. (1) directed the complainant to pay a total sum of Rs. 10,000/-. This amount was comprised of the legitimate application fee and an additional sum identified as an illegal bribery amount. Accused No. (1) instructed the complainant to remit this total amount to accused No. (2). As per the complaint of the complainant, and during a trap operation orchestrated with a video recorder in Rajkot, the complainant engaged in a mobile phone conversation with accused No. (1). During this call, accused No. (1) instructed the complainant to send accused No. (2) to the complainant's home to collect the money. Accordingly, accused No. (2) arrived at the complainant's residence, discussed to the point, and demanded Rs. 10,000/- as the bribe amount. Accused No. (2) then accepted the said amount, returned Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant, and retained Rs. 9,000/-. Panch No. 1 eyewitnessed this exchange of the bribe amount. Subsequent to the acceptance of the money, the complainant and accused No. (2) jointly communicated with accused No. (1) via the complainant's mobile phone, confirming the receipt of the money. This fact has been corroborated by call recordings of conversations held with the accused both prior to and during the bribery trap, as well as by the video recording captured during the trap operation. Thus, both accused, acting in collusion with others, misused their official designations as Government Servants and thereby committed a criminal offense. A subsequent investigation conducted at the accused's office regarding the complainant's legitimate application revealed that the actual legal fees payable were Rs. 4,820/-. However, the accused persons did not deposit any fees for the complainant's electricity connection, leading to the accepted amount by accused No. (2) being classified as a bribe.

3.2 Upon the discovery of sufficient evidence indicating that both accused persons have committed offenses punishable under Sections 7 , 12, 13(1)(d), and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, a charge sheet, bearing No. 02/2021 and dated 19/03/2021, was filed against them at the A.C.B. Police Station. This determination was made based on the witness statements as well as the documentary/scientific evidence gathered during the investigation of the case. Upon its production before the Honourable Special Court, Rajkot, the matter has been committed as Special Case No. 02/2021 to the said Honourable Court.

3.3 Hence, present petition for quashment of the FIR and consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR.

4. Learned adv