JUDGMENT :

Heard Heard Mr. G. Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. Makhan Phukan, learned Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent.

2. This petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 17(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, is preferred by the petitioner, namely, Indrajit Bora, for quashing the FIR of A.C.B. P.S. Case No.69/2023.

3. The factual background of filing of the present petition is briefly stated as under:-

“On 15.09.2023, Shri Sangkha Swargiary, Dy. S.P. of Police Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Assam lodged on FIR with the O/C A.C.B. Police Station to the effect that during investigation of A.C.B. P.S. Case No.17/2023, u/s 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, a trap was laid at the official Chamber of Indrajit Bora, the then Chief Engineer, Gauhati Municipality Corporation and he was arrested on a trap operation in connection with the said case for demanding and accepting illegal gratification of Rs.6000/- from the informant namely, Shri Ajit Borah. Subsequently, rented Flat of Shri Indrajit Bora was searched and during search a sum of Rs.6,93,600/- was recovered and seized in connection with the said case. Shri Indrajit Bora has failed to satisfactorily account for the aforementioned sum, and it appears that he has accumulated such through dishonest and fraudulent means and had intentionally enriched himself illicitly during the period of his tenure. Also it has been found that he has maintained 17 accounts in his name in addition to his salary account in State Bank of India. And during search of his residential premises it has been found that his wife own one Innova Car and one Audi make luxury car. Besides, it has been found that his family members have various moveable and immovable assets which need to be verified. And therefore it is suspected that he has accumulated assets, disproportionate to his known source of income using the colour of his office in order to enrich himself during the period of his office.”

4. Upon the said FIR, the Officer-in-Charge of A.C.B. Police Station had registered a case, being A.C.B. P.S. Case No.69/2023, under sections 13(2) read with section 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and endorsed Smti Olindita Gogoi, Superintendent of Police, to investigate the same.

5. Before the case came to be registered on 15.09.2023, the Superintendent of Police, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption, vide letter dated 11.04.2023, Memo No.DGVA/RI/2023/2402, sought approval for registering a regular case, under sections 13(2) read with section 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, against the present petitioner, who was arrested in connection with A.C.B. P.S. Case No.17/2023, u/s 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, from the Government of Assam. And accordingly, vide letter dated 05.09.2023, Memo No.PLA(V)112/2023/8, the Government of Assam had accorded approval for registering a regular case, under sections 13(2) read with section 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, against the present petitioner.

6. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this court for quashing the said FIR on the following grounds:-

(i) Section 17(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act put a bar that - no police officers shall conduct any enquiry or inquiry or investigation into any offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant under this Act, where the alleged offence is relatable to any recommendation made or decision taken by such public servant in discharge of his official functions or duties, without the previous approval of the concerned Government. But, in the case in hand investigation was conducted without approval of the Government in ACB P.S. Case No.17/2023, u/s 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(ii) That, the investigating agency, vide letter dated 11.04.2023, Memo No.DGVA/RI/2023/2402, sought approval for regis