( 1 ) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order dt. 28. 12. 1994 passed by the Special Judge, Dhar, in Sp. Case No. 4/93. The petitioner has filed an application before the Special Judge, for dropping up the criminal proceedings and by the aforesaid order the same has been rejected.

( 2 ) THE short facts giving rise to the present application are that one Deepakbhai Patel, gave an information to the Supdt. of Police of the Special Police Establishment stating therein that he is the Manager of the Appex Electro Statistics. He has further stated in his application that he has filed return in the office of Central Excise and the petitioner, who happens to be a Superintendent of Central Excise, demanded an illegal gratification of Rs. 5000/- for clearance of the monthly forms. Said Patel, in his information, further stated that he did not want to give illegal gratification to the Superintendent and desired that he be apprehended. Accordingly, a trap was led on 31. 1. 1994 and Rs. 5000/- alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

( 3 ) SHRI Saxena, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the conduct of investigation and submissions of the challan by the Special Police Establishment is totally unauthorised. As such the learned counsel submitted that the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the offence on the basis of totally unauthorised investigation.

( 4 ) SHRI G. Desai, Dy. G. A. appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the Special Police Establishment has been declared as a Police Station. The Dy. Supdt. of Police in the Special Police Establishment is competent to investigate the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

( 5 ) TO buttress his submission, Shri Saxena has drawn my attention to the preamble of the M. P. Lokayukt Evam Uplokayukt Adhiniyam 1981 (Act No. 37 of 1981) wherein it has been stated that the institution of Lokayukt and Uplokayukt have been constituted for making enquire into the allegations against public servants.

( 6 ) SHRI Saxena has further drawn my attention to 5. 7 which confers power on Lokayuktl uplokayukt for making enquiry on a complaint or other information. He pointedly drawn my attention to the explanation to S. 7 which reads thus: Sec. 7: Metters which may be enquired into by Lokayukt or uplokayukt. Subject to the provisions of this Act, on receiving complaint or other information: (i) The Lokayukt may proceed to enquire into an allegation made against a public servant in relation to whom the Chief Minister is the competent authority; (ii) the uplokayukt may proceed to enquiry into an allegation made against any public servant other than that referred to in clause (i ). Provided that the Lokayukt may enquire into an allegation made against any public servant referred to in clause (ii ). Explanation: For the purpose of this section, the expression may proceed toenquire and may enquire include investigation by police agency put at the disposal of Lokayukt and Uplokayukt in pursuance of sub-section (3) of section 13. ( 7 ) SHRI Saxena has further drawn my attention to 5. 4 of M. P. Special Police Establishment Act 1947 (M. P. Act No. XVII of 1947) where by the superintendent of the M. P. Special Police Establishment was vested in the Lokayukt and Uplokayukt appointed unders. 3 of the Act No. 37 of 1981.

( 8 ) THE terms Officer and Public Servantt have been defined under 5. 2 (s) and 2 (g) of the Act which read as follows: Sec. 2 (s) Officer means a person appointed to a public service of post in connection with the affairs of the State of Madhya Pradesh. Sec. 2 (g) Public Servant means person falling under any of the following categories, namely: (i) Minister, (ii) a person having the rank of a Minister but shall not include Speaker and. Deputy Speaker of the Madhya Pradesh Vidhan Sabha and Neta Pratipaksha; (iii) an officer referred to in clause (a); (iv) an officer of an apex Cooperative Society or District Cooperative Society