ORDER :

1. Heard Sri. Pranjal Krishna, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, the learned counsel representing the respondent no. 1 – C.B.I. and Dr. V. K. Singh, the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 -Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow.

2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner has challenged validity of the order dated 28.05.2019 passed by the Learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, C.B.I (West), Lucknow in Criminal Case No. 545 of 2017, whereby the application dated 07.03.2019 filed by the petitioner challenging the prosecution sanction order dated 26.10.2017 passed by the Vice Chancellor of the University has been rejected.

3. The petitioner was working as a Professor in the University since 25.06.2011. Sri. Ved Kumar, who was working as an Assistant Professor in the University on contractual basis, filed a Complaint dated 31.05.2017 against Vijay Kumar Dwivedi, an outsourced private staff engaged by a private firm M/s Shri Sai Nath Associates and working at the University, alleging a demand of illegal gratification of Rs.50,000/-for extension of the complainant’s contract of service beyond 31.05.2017. In furtherance of the aforesaid complaint, an F.I.R. bearing R.C. No. 0062017A0012 dated 02.06.2017 was lodged under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in Police Station C.B.I/A.C.B/ Lucknow. The petitioner was not named in the complaint or in the F.I.R.

4. A trap was laid on 02.06.2017 and the named accused Vijay Dwivedi was caught red-handed while demanding and accepting Rs.50,000/-bribe from the complainant for extension of his contract of service. The accused Vijay Dwivedi said that he had demanded and accepted the bribe on behalf of the petitioner, who had directed him to collect Rs.50,000/-as bribe from each of the Assistant Professors working on contractual basis, who wanted to get their service tenure extended. Two telephonic conversations were arranged and recorded between the petitioner and Vijay Dwivedi, in which the petitioner acknowledged the information given by Vijay Dwivedi that he had collected the money from various teachers. A file marked Extension of Contractual Faculty was recovered from the office of the petitioner.

5. After completion of investigation, on 01.08.2017 the C.B.I. filed a charge-sheet against the petitioner and Vijay Dwivedi alleging commission of offences under Section 120-B I.P.C. and Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

6. Sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 for the Prosecution of the petitioner was accorded by the Vice Chancellor of the University on 26.10.2017.

7. On 05.07.2018, the Learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, C.B.I. (West), Lucknow, took cognizance of commission of the offences on the basis of the Sanction Order dated 26.10.2017 and it proceeded with the trial.

8. On 08.01.2019, the trial Court started recording the examination-in-chief of PW-1 Sri. R. C. Sobati, Vice-Chancellor of the University the person who had issued the order sanctioning prosecution of the petitioner, and his cross-examination also started on the same date, which was concluded on 21.01.2019.

9. On 07.03.2019 the petitioner filed an application before the trial Court challenging validity of the sanction order dated 26.10.2017 on the ground that sanction for prosecution can be granted only by the appointing authority of the petitioner, which is the Board of Management of the University. The Vice-Chancellor of the University is not the petitioner’s appointing authority and the prosecution sanction granted by the Vice-Chancellor was without authority.

10. The petitioner’s application challenging validity of the prosecution sanction order was rejected by the trial Court vide order dated 28.05.2019, on the ground that the Vice-Chancellor had passed prosecution sanction order on behalf of the Board of Management of the Univer