The Special Judge, appointed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, can exercise powers under Section 457 or 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

S.C. Pandey, J.

1. This Revision is directed against the order dated 10-6-99 passed in respect of Crime No. 135/98 by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen.

2. It appears that Karodilal Soni was working as a Patwari in District and Tehsil Raisen. An F.I.R, was lodged against him alleging that he had amassed Rs. 15,79,262.00 during the course of his service by the Authorised Officer of Special Police Establishment Lokayukt. This amount was alleged to be more than the income he could have earned from known source of his income. It is not disputed before me by the learned counsel for the respondent that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed, although the F.I.R. was lodged as far as back on 6-11-98.

3. It is alleged in this revision that persuant to the F.I.R. the State of M.P. through Special Police Establishment (Lokayukt) Officer, Bhopal started investigation. Consequently, the premises belonging to the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 the sons of Karodilal Soni were raided. It is alleged that considerable property including jewellery was seized from the house of applicant No. 1 Hemant Soni and applicant No. 2 Narendra Soni. Therefore, the applicants applied for under Section 451, Code of Criminal Procedure read with Section 457 thereof for custody of the property seized by the police. The application was rejected by the order dated 10-6-99 almost a year after the F.I.R. was lodged. Two earlier applications were also rejected. It was observed by the learned Judge, while rejecting the application, that he was not in a position to understand why there is delay in launching the prosecution by filing a charge-sheet. According to him, no new ground was raised for delay in filing the charge-sheet. However, he rejected the application. This case has been pending in this Court since 21-6-99 after it was admitted.

4. The learned Government advocate was given time to find out whether the respondent had filed the charge-sheet. He categorically made a statement before this Court that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent has raised an objection to exercise of power under Section 397/401 of Code of Criminal Procedure that the provision of Section 457 or 451 of that Code do hot apply to the case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the Act'). However, the applicants contend that those provisions are applicable.

6. The question is if the Special Judge trying an offence under the Provisions of the Act cannot exercise the powers conferred upon a Magistrate under Section 457 or 451 of Cr.P.C. The answer to this question shall depend upon the nature of powers exercised by the Special Judge. Section 3 of the Act confers powers on the Central or State Government to appoint a Special Judge, who is or has been a Sessions Judge or an Additional Sessions Judge or an Assistant Judge under the Code for Criminal Procedure. This appointment has to be done in respect of an area by the appropriate government by issuing a Notification in the Official Gazette. It is apparent that a Special Judge is the creature of statute; and consequently he can exercise only those powers which are conferred upon him by 'the Act'. The Special Judge appointed for an area can try an offence covered by sub-section (1) of Section 3, if the offence is committed in that area. The further question is : What further powers are conferred under 'the Act' upon the Special Judge when he tries a case for commission of an offence under the Act ? The key of this question is found in Section 5 of the Act. Under Section 5(1) of the Act, the Special Judge is entitled to take cognizance of an offence under the Act without the case being committed to him. He is enjoined to follow the warrant procedure followed by a Magistrate under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thus the Special Judge exercises the powers of a Magistrate. The Special Judge is conferred with power to grant pardon specifically for the purpose of sub-sections (1) to (5) of S