ORDER

1. Petitioner has filed this petition, under section 482 of the Cr.P.C, challenging the validity of the order dated 31/5/2018 passed in MJCR No. 01/14 by Ist ASJ, Vidisha and subsequent order dated 22/10/2020 passed in MJCr No. 158/20 by Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short “the PC Act”),Vidisha.

2. The facts of the case, in short, are as under:-

(i)Petitioner was appointed in the Rural Engineering Services Department and he was posted as Sub Divisional Officer at Sironj, District Vidisha. While discharging his official duties at Sironj, he granted administrative sanction of Rs.1,50,000/- for the construction of a cement concrete road in Village Tonk within Gram Panchayat Tiloni in the financial year 2008-2009. For the aforesaid work, the fund was allotted by a local MLA and NAREGA. The aforesaid work was being supervised by Shri R.S.Verma, Sub Engineer Janpad Panchayat Lateri vide letter dated 17/3/2009 issued by the petitioner. Shri Verma was instructed by the petitioner to carry out and complete the work as per the procedure and instructions (3) M.Cr.C. No.48392/2020 received from higher Authorities from time to time. The Office of Executive Engineer issued a specific instruction vide letter dated 2/12/2009 to procure material through quotations in accordance with settled departmental procedure.

(ii)According to the petitioner, vide letter dated 27/1/2020, he instructed Shri R.S.Verma, Sub Engineer to stop the work of construction of the CC Road as there was no compliance of specification and departmental instructions. Despite that, contractor continued with the work and submitted bills and Form No.24 in the Office. According to the petitioner, all these bills were not presented before him by the concerned clerk. He inspected the site on 4/2/2010 and noticed that CC road had been constructed contrary to the settled norms and technical specifications issued by the department. Immediately he issued a letter dated 10/2/2010 to Shri R.S.Verma, Sub Engineer to cancel the entire work done by the contractor and get it redone as per the technical specifications. The petitioner also directed for recovery of payment from the contractor. Because of the aforesaid strict action, Sub Engineer R.S.Verma and contractor Surat Singh Raghuvanshi developed ill-will and a grudge (4) M.Cr.C. No.48392/2020 against him and made a plan to falsely implicate him.

(iii)The contractor Surat Singh Raghuvanshi submitted a complaint to the Superintendent of Police of SPE Bhopal that the petitioner has demanded an illegal gratification of Rs.30,000/- to release the pending bills. After preliminary verification, the complaint was entertained, and a trap was organized. The complainant was called upon to arrange for currency notes to be handed over to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, he had never demanded such a bribe, therefore, such an illegal trap failed. Despite that, the Investigation Officer continued with the investigation under the provisions of S.7 of the PC Act and directed the petitioner to give his voice sample for matching with his voice recorded during the conversation with the contractor/complainant in which an illegal demand was made. The petitioner gave his voice sample on 1/7/2010.

(iv)Again after two years, vide letter dated 6/12/2012 issued by the Investigating Officer, the petitioner was called upon to give the voice sample. The first sample taken by the petitioner was sent to Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh for comparison with the recorded conversation with the (5) M.Cr.C. No.48392/2020 complainant, which was rejected as the voice of the petitioner was not clear and suitable for matching. It seems that because of this report, the Investigating Officer called upon the petitioner to give a fresh voice samp