JUDGMENT :

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

1. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 5389 of 2023 has been filed by the applicant Anil Kumar Singh challenging validity of (i) the Charge-sheet no. 6 arising out of Crime No. RC 216 2022 A 0012 dated 10.09.2022 under Sections 120-B, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station CBI/AC-I, New Delhi, so far as it relates to him (ii) prosecution sanction order dated 27.03.2023, (iii) the cognizance and summoning order dated 06.04.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption, C.B.I., West, Lucknow in Session Case No. 709 of 2023 and (iv) the consequential proceedings of Session Case No. 709 of 2023 pending in the court of Special Judge, C.B.I., West, Lucknow.

2. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 5391 of 2023 has been filed by the applicants -(1) Bedram Sharma, (2) Parsuram Sharma and (3) Anand Mohan Sharma challenging validity of (i) the Charge-sheet no. 6 arising out of Crime No. RC 216 2022 A 0012 dated 10.09.2022 under Section 120-B I.P.C. and Sections 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station CBI/AC-I, New Delhi, so far as it relates to them (ii) the cognizance and summoning order dated 06.04.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption, C.B.I., West, Lucknow in Session Case No. 709 of 2023 and (iii) the consequential proceedings of Session Case No. 709 of 2023 pending in the court of Special Judge, C.B.I., West, Lucknow.

3. As both the applications challenge the same proceedings on the same set of grounds, both the applications are being decided by a common judgment.

4. Heard Sri Raju Ramchandran Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Purnendu Chakravarty and Sri Anuj Tandon Advocates, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the respondent -C.B.I. assisted by Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh and perused the record.

5. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R lodged on 10.09.2022 alleging that Anil Kumar Singh operates from the local office of M/s Voyants Solution Pvt. Ltd. and the co-accused Bedram Sharma of M/s S.R.S.C Infra Pvt. Ltd. approached Anil Kumar Singh for clearing pending bills and Anil Kumar Singh assured him of favorable clearance in lieu illegal gratification demanded by him and in pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy, certain bills of M/s S.R.S.C Infra Pvt. Ltd. were cleared by Anil Kumar Singh.

6. The F.I.R alleges commission of offence under Section 120-B I.P.C read with Section 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Prevention of Act, 1988, by the named accused persons and other unknown public servants and private persons.

7. The charge-sheet submitted by the C.B.I. states that Anil Kumar Singh was performing public duties while functioning as the Resident Engineer for the project and he had the authority to certify payments of the contractors. Anil Kumar Singh dishonestly demanded and accepted bribe as a motive/reward for recommending interim payment of bills.

8. Sri Raju Ramchandran Senior Advocate, the learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicant in Application No. 5389 of 2023 Anil Kumar Singh, is not a ‘public servant’ as per the definition of the term given in Section 2(c) of the National Highway Authority of India Act (hereinafter referred as ‘N.H.A.I.’ Act) and, therefore, he cannot be prosecuted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, which contains provisions for offences committed by public servants only.

9. The learned Counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicants in Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 5391 of 2023 -(1) Bedram Sharma, (2) Parsuram Sharma and (3) Anand Mohan Sharma have been charged for commission of offences under Section 120-B I.P.C. and Sections 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, for entering into a criminal conspiracy with Anil Kumar Singh (the applicant in Application No. 5389 of 2023) and because Anil Kumar S