The applicant has no right to challenge the impugned charge sheet or the order taking cognizance as the investigation against the applicant is still pending and no process under Section 204 Cr.P.C. has been issued against him.

RAMESH SINHA, J.

1. Heard Sri Dileep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amrit Raj Chaurasia, learned AGA for the State and perused the material brought on record.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. Application has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 18.9.2018 being charge sheet no.291 of 2018 and entire proceedings of criminal case no.160 of 2018/ State Vs. P.C. Gupta and others based on charge sheet arising out of case crime no.0421 of 2018, P.S. Kasna, district Gautam Budh Nagar, pending in the court of Special Judge, Court No.2, Anti Corruption, Meerut u/s 420, 467, 468 471, 120-B IPC and 13(1)(C), 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act so far as it relates to the applicant and the order dated 20.9.2018 passed by Special Judge, Court No.2, Anti Corruption, Meerut by which learned Special Judge has taken cognizance and issued process as against the applicant.

3. The brief facts of the case are that an FIR was lodged against the applicant and twenty other co-accused persons along with other officials of Yamuna Expressway, Industrial Development Authority, Kasna, Gautam Buddha Nagar by opposite party no.2 on 3.6.2018 at Police Station Kasna, District Gautam Buddha Nagar which was registered as Case Crime No.421 of 2018, u/s 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and 13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

4. As per allegations made in the FIR, it is highlighted that the Chief Executive Officer of Yamuna Expressway and other concerned officers with a conspiracy and purchased the land in higher rate (twice to the prevailing rate) and got made the payment to their own kith and kin and close relatives and in this way, they have wrongfully gain through their relatives and caused wrongful loss to the authority. Thus they committed an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. It is also alleged in the FIR that after purchase of 57.1549 Hectares land, no fruitful purpose is being served and the said land is lying useless and there is no hope for its proper use in future. In the transaction of purchase of land for the purposes of exit-entry ramp in proportionate of 7% policy and for future development of appurtenant land number of irregularities have been highlighted in the FIR out of which the relevant highlighted irregularity is that the land was purchased in scattered area and further that the high prices have been paid in purchasing the land and further that some of the lands have been purchased without seeking approval of the Board and some of the land is not shown in concessionaire (agreement) with M/s J.P. Associates. The transparency has also not been adopted by following the Government settled norms in purchasing of the land.

5. The Investigating Officer after investigation of the case has submitted charge sheet on 18.9.2018 against accused P.C. Gupta who was the then CEO of the said authority. On 20.9.2018, the learned Special Judge (Anti-Corruption), Meerut after perusing the case diary and other relevant documents, found prima-facie a case against the accused P.C. Gupta and took cognizance of the offence and directed that the case be registered. The said order appears to have been passed on the certified copy of the charge sheet which finds place, copy of which is annexed as Annexure No.8 from page nos. 77 to 137. So far as other accused persons named in the FIR are concerned, the Investigating Officer kept the investigation pending as their arrest could not be made by him.

6. The applicant has filed the present 482 Cr.P.C. Application challenging the impugned charge sheet dated 18.9.2018 being charge sheet no.291 of 2018 and entire proceedings of criminal case no.160 of 2018/ based on charge sheet and order taking cognizance dated 20.9.2018 passed by Special Judge, Court No.2, Anti Corruption, Meerut by which it is stated that the Special Judge has taken cognizance against the applicant and issued process, hence the same be quashed against him.

7. The learned AGA has raised prelim