2024:CGHC:39627 AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 138 of 2021 Reserved on 1-8-2024. Passed on 07-10-2024 •Sunil Kumar Mall S/o Late Shyam Sunder Mall Aged About 52 Years R/o 8/2 Landon Street, Kolkata 700017 (West Bengal ... Applicant versus

1.Central Bureau Of Investigation Constituted Under The Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 Through Superintendent Of Police C B I / E O U Iii, 3rd Floor, C B I Headquarters, 5- B Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003

2.State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs, Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. B.P. Sharma, Mr. Vaibhav Tiwari and Ms. Anuja Sharma, Advocates.

For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Vaibhav A. Goverdhan, Advocate.

For respondent No.2/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Advocate General.

(Hon’ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas)

C A V Order

1. The applicant has filed this Criminal Revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 against the order dated 1-2-2021 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Special Judge of Special Court for trial of CBI cases, Raipur (CG), in Special Case No. 53 of 2012 whereby the application filed by the applicant under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946( for short, DSPE Act, 1946”) for discharge of the accused for offence punishable under Sections 120-B & 420 of IPC and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, has been rejected and the learned Special Court has fixed the matter for prosecution evidence on

08.03.2021.

2. The brief facts as reflected from the record are that the final report was registered on 30-7-2012 against the applicant and other accused persons for offence punishable under Sections 120-B & 420 of IPC and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 wherein it has been alleged that the case is registered on the basis of source information received against Shri Surendera Singhai, the then Regional Chief, HUDCO, Raipur wherein it has been mentioned that while working as Regional Chief, HUDCO Raipur, he entered into criminal conspiracy with Shri Sunil Mall, the Directors of M/s. Sunil Ispat & Power Ltd., registered office Cresent Tower, 6^th floor, 229, ACJ Bose Road, Kolkata and plant sight at Village- Cheraipani, Raigarh with a view to cause undue pecuniary gain to themselves by causing undue pecuniary loss to HUDCO and in pursuance of criminal conspiracy, the amount of Rs. 24.50 crore was sanctioned by HUDCO Board at New Delhi to the company wherein the petitioner was director to stall a captive power plant (CPP) but the said CPP is not commenced at all. Accordingly, after investigation charge-sheet dated 31.12.2012 was submitted before the Special Judge, Raipur. It is also case of the prosecution that the loan was sanctioned by HUDCO Board, New Delhi in its meeting held on 31.08.2006 without following the due process of law. It is also case of the prosecution that M/s SIPL submitted fresh application for loan of Rs. 25.50 crore on 20.02.2006 to HUDCO Kolkata for HUDCO Captive Power Plant and the committee so constituted has inspected the site on 22.03.2006 and thereafter the project appraisal committee in its meeting held on 28.03.2006 has considered the report and thereafter the Board has sanctioned Rs. 24.50 crores in its 398^th Meeting of the Board on 31.03.2014.

3. The applicant has moved an application for discharge of the accused on 26-2-2020 mainly contended that the CBI has been constituted under Section 6 of the Delhi Police Establishment Act, 1946 (for short, “the Act, 1946”) and from perusal of Section 6 of the Act, it is clear that any member of the DSPE ie., CBI cannot exercise its power and jurisdiction in the State of Chhattisgarh without prior consent from the Government of the Chhattisgarh. It is further contended that the State of Chhattisgarh vide a letter bearing No. 695/Home/2001 date