1. Ghulam Mohd Muchi (PW 1) in company with Sonaullah Mochi (PW 2) lodged FIR EXPW 1/2 on 16-1-1978 with Police Station Anti Corruption at Srinagar with incriminating allegations that in order to lift a fallen mulberry tree from his land, he approached accused Prem Math, Patwari of his Halqa (Chogal) Handwara for being favoured with a copy of Fardi Intikhab and site plan. He met Patwari number of times and requested for the documents. The accused at long last demanded Rs. 60/- as illegal gratification from him for supplying the copy of Fardi Intikhab. He paid accused Rs. 20/- on 14-1-78 in presence of Sonaullah (PW-2) and Sultan Mochi (PW.7). The remaining amount of Rs. 40/- was promised to be paid on 16-1-1978. He approached the Anti-Corruption Department at Srinagar. The Anti-Corruption Police Station Registered FIR 1/78 under Section 5(2) P. C. Act read with Sec. 161 R. P. C. and took action while remaining Rs. 40/- were to be paid to the Patwari at Handwara. The number of currency notes were recorded in Fardi Waqa EXPW 1/3 and returned to the complainant. A trap was arranged by ACCK at Handwara. It was planned that on passing of money the complainant will raise his cap to signal the payment. At Handwara, Shri M. L. Kaul Magistrate was also associated with the trap. The complainant and the raiding party was searched and certificate was prepared. Four currency notes of rupees ten denomination each (Rs. 40/-) of which were recorded were handed over to complainant. The complainant met the accused in Handwara Market and after payment of money signaled the trap party of the Vigilance Department who came and after disclosing their identity, searched the person of accused and recovered four currency notes from right side inner pocket of the coat worn by the accused. Seizure EXPW 1/5 was prepared alongwith seizure memo of Coat EXPW 1/1. The statements of witnesses were recorded and other investigative steps were taken. On completion of the investigation challan was produced before the Court of Anti Corruption Special Judge, Anti-Corruption at Srinagar on 9-9-1981.

2. The accused was tried after being charged with offence under section 5(2) P. C. Act read with 161 R. P. C to which he pleaded not guilty. Prosecution has examined 13 witnesses and has also placed on record F. I. R. memos, site plan, etc. The accused has tendered three witnesses in his defence. At the conclusion of the trial the Special Judge Anticorruption, Srinagar vide judgment dated 28-3-1986, has acquitted the accused of the charges under section 5(2) P. C. Act read with Section 161 RPC, primarily for want of sanction/defective sanction to prosecute the accused as required under the provisions of law.

3. The appeal has been filed against this acquittal by the State on 11-7-1986. The judgment has been assailed on the ground that the judgment is against the facts and law and the sanction for prosecution is valid. Even if, there have been more than one sanction, the State was within its rights to rely on any one of the sanction for authorising prosecution of the accused. The accuseds acquittal has not been on technical grounds. The trial court has not applied its mind to the facts of the case and the accused has been given acquittal wrongly and not in-accordance with law.

4. Mr. G. Ali, GA, represents the State/ Appellant, has been heard. Respondent-accused (Prem Nath Patwari) despite the effort has not been traced and has not appeared before the Court after March 28,1988. Mr. G. Ali, submits that respondent is a migrant, who is neither traceable nor his whereabouts can be found. It was in these circumstances that despite affording number of opportunities to the respondent-accused as he did not appear. Mr. G. Ali, GA, was heard.

5. No court is empowered to take cognizance of offence punishable in this case, under section 5(2) P. C. Act 2006 read with section 161 Ranbir Penal Code except with the previous sanction of the State Government. It is not in dispute that the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document