IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 06.12.2023 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.25674 of 2023 and Crl.M.P.No.17818 of 2023 K.Narashimman ... Petitioner Vs.

State represented by its, The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Wing, Krishnagiri.

Crime No.8/AC/2018 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, pleased to call for the records relating to the order dated 11.10.2023 made in Crl.M.P.No.10219 of 2023 in Spl.C.C.No.01 of 2020 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri and set aside the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Manoharan For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner (A1), who has been facing trial in Spl.C.C.No.01 of 2020 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri, seeking to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.10219 of 2023 in Spl.C.C.No.01 of 2020 dated 11.10.2023, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 91 of Cr.P.C.

2. The brief facts of the case is that on the basis of the complaint given by one Jayakumar/de facto complainant alleging that the accused/ petitioner herein had demanded illegal gratification of Rs.15,000/- for allotment of a Panchayat shop on rent to the de facto complainant, the respondent Police has registered a case in Crime No.8/AC/2018 for the offence under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 1988, against the petitioner, who was working as a Project Director/Joint Director, District Rural Development Agency, Krishnagiri, and another on 06.09.2018.

3. The demand of illegal gratification was stated to have been made twice by one K.Sathiyamoorthy (A2), who was a Record Clerk in the office of the District Rural Development Agency, Krishnagiri, on behalf of the petitioner herein, first time on 30.08.2013 and second time on 05.09.2018 and since the de facto complainant was not inclined to pay the bribe, he lodged the complaint on 06.09.2018, pursuant to which, the trap was laid by the Trap Laying Officer on 07.09.2018. After completion of investigation, the respondent Police has filed the final report and the case has also been taken up for trial in Spl.C.C.No.01 of 2020 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri.

4. As per police report, the entire trap team proceeded to the office of the accused, wherein, A2 had obtained the tainted money of Rs.15,000/- from the de facto complainant and handed over the same to one Ashokraj (A3). Thereafter, based on the pre-assigned signal given by the de facto complainant, the Trap Laying Officer had proceeded to the scene of occurrence and arrested A2 and A3 and later, based on the statements recorded from A2 and A3, A1 was arrested on 07.9.2018 at 6.00 pm, and remanded to judicial custody on the same day.

5. The respondent after completion of investigation, has filed the final report against the petitioner and two others for the alleged offence under Sections 7 (a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 r/w 120 B IPC and the case was taken up for trial in Spl.C.C.No.1 of 2020. The petitioner was issued summons and the copies were served on him in compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C.

6. It is the case of the petitioner that after coming out on bail, the petitioner had sent representations dated 21.12.2018 and 10.09.2019 respectively to the Additional Secretary to the Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9 with a request to direct the respondent to secure the cell phone call details of the Authorities concerned and the video footages recorded during the course of the trap. However, no action was taken on the said representations.

7. The petitioner had contended that since the documents relating to the decisions taken on the representations dated 21.12.2018 and 10.09.2019 respectively sent to the Secretary t