The main legal point established in the judgment is that the investigation and prosecution for an offence should be conducted by the competent authority within the jurisdiction where the offence was committed, and a proper investigation and satisfaction by the authorized investigating authority are essential before filing a charge sheet.

1. This Miscellaneous Criminal Case (M.Cr.C.) under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeks to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court for the quashment of the charge sheet filed by respondent No. 1 against the applicant in respect of Crime No. 4/2001 said to be registered by State Economic Offences Bureau, Raipur, Chhattisgarh on the grounds that at the relevant time when the alleged offence was said to be committed by the applicant he was in the service of State of M.P. was posted as Assistant Labour Commissioner and further holding the charge of Welfare Commissioner, M.P. Labour Welfare Board, M.P. Bhopal. However, on reorganization of the State of Madhya Pradesh in the year 2000 and constitution of the State of Chhattisgarh, the services of the applicant were allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh where at present he is working. It is contended by the applicant that on or about 8.11.2001 some complaint was made against the applicant that while he was working in the State of M.P. he has committed the offence by illegally drawing the amount of travelling allowance bills at Bhopal. It was alleged that the applicant was required to travel on official duties while he was in the State of M.P. and for the said travelling the applicant has claimed the bills amounting to Rs. 48,327/-. According to the complaint, it was found that the applicant has not travelled in the relevant class of the railway, but, instead charged for the same by manipulating the record. On receipt of such a complaint Crime No. 4/2001 was said to be registered by the Economic Offence Bureau at Chhattisgarh and some sort of enquiry was conducted.

2. The case of the applicant is that since the offence was alleged to have been committed at Bhopal where at the relevant time he was posted, the amount of travelling allowance was drawn at Bhopal from the accounts of the State of M.P. no crime could have been registered against the applicant in the State of Chhattisgarh as that authority was having no jurisdiction to do so. For the purposes of quashing of such proceedings, he approached the High Court of Chhattisgarh by filing M.Cr.C. No. 67/2003 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the said proceedings, a statement was filed by the respondent-State of Chhattisgarh contending that they were not intending to prosecute the applicant for any such offence, as the same was not within the jurisdiction of the said State. The said M.Cr.C. was thus disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider the entire material available on record before reaching to any conclusion and thereafter to proceed in accordance to law.

3. It is the case of the applicant that since cognizance of any such offence was not to be taken by the State of Chhattisgarh, after conducting enquiry, which, at the best, can be said to be preliminary enquiry, the matter was required to be referred to the State of M.P. and, if necessary, the State of M.P. was required to get the crime investigated and then to file the charge sheet against the applicant, if any prima-facie case was made out. Instead of conducting any investigation, only on the basis of whatever investigation conducted by the Economic Offence Bureau, Chhattisgarh, the impugned charge sheet has been filed before the Special Court on 16.2.2010. Therefore, the same is liable to be quashed.

4. This Court has entertained this application, directed the supply of the copy of the same to the standing counsel of the respondent. At a later stage, the respondent No. 2 was added as a party and the notice of this M.Cr.C. was issued to the said authority. Time was granted to file the reply.

5. The respondent No. 1 in its reply has contended that the application is premature, as no cognizance whatsoever has been taken by the Court as yet, where the charge sheet has been filed and applicant still can raise objection with respect to the jurisdiction of the said Court or its competence to take cognizance in the matter. Inste