S.S. Mishra, J. In this Criminal Revision Petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.07.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Cuttack in T.R. Case No.17 of 2019 arising out of Vigilance G.R. Case No.45 of 2010, whereby cognizance of offences punishable under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the P.C.

Act, 1988 and Sections 420/120-B of the IPC has been taken against the petitioner and the other co-accused persons.

2.

An F.I.R. was lodged on 30.06.2010 by the Inspector of Vigilance, Cuttack and registered as Cuttack Vigilance P.S. Case No.45 dated 30.06.2010. In the F.I.R., it was alleged that the accused persons had illegally shown distribution of coal in favour of six fake MSME Units to derive pecuniary advantage for their personal benefit, violating the New Coal Distribution Policy. The Odisha Small Industries Corporation Ltd. (OSIC) and the District Industries Centers were required to distribute coal as per the guidelines, to different MSME in a realistic manner. It came to light during physical verification by the Vigilance Department on 19.05.2010 that linkage coal has been sold in favour of fake firms, as named in the F.I.R., though there was no existence of said firms.

However, the distribution of coal to those firms has been shown on record. Further, certain irregularities in the sale price of coal as compared to the market rate, were also seen. The total amount of pecuniary advantage gained by the accused persons has been computed to the tune of Rs.22,38,609/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Nine) in the charge sheet and total 12 accused persons have been named therein, including the present petitioner.

3.

After the completion of investigation, the Vigilance Department submitted charge sheet against 12 accused persons including the present petitioner. There were specific allegations made against the petitioner.

On the basis of material available on record, the Vigilance Department applied for grant of sanction to prosecute the petitioner as required under Section 19 of the P.C. Act. The competent authority, vide Office Order dated 23.07.2018, declined to grant sanction to prosecute the petitioner.

The Office Order dated 23.07.2018 reads as under:

“Confidential Government of Odisha General Administration & Public Grievance Department No.GAD-SC-VG-0063-2016-20828/Gen, Bhubaneswar, dated 23 July, 2018 From Sri Pradeep Kumar Biswal, IAS, Additional Secretary to Government To The Deputy Secretary to Government G.A. (Vigilance) Department, Odisha, Cuttack Sub:

Sanction of prosecution against Sri Sitikanta Sarangi, Ex-G.M., D.I.C., Jagatpur, at present Joint Director of Industries, Cuttack and 2) Sri Sailendra Narayan Nayak, the thenAsst.

Manager (Project), D.I.C., Jagatpur, Cuttack in Cuttack Vigilance P.S. Case No.45 dt.30.6.2010. Sir, I am directed to invite reference to your office letter NO.5373/Vig. Cell, dated 28.7.2015 on the subject mentioned above and to say that after careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and material evidences on records, Government have been pleased to decline the proposal for according sanction of prosecution against Sri Sitikanta Sarangi, Ex-G.M., D.I.C., Jagatpur, at present Joint Director of Industries, Cuttack and 2) Sri Sailendra Narayan Nayak, the then Asst.

Manager (Project), D.I.C., Jagatpur, Cuttack in Cuttack in Vigilance P.S. Case No.45, dt.30.6.2010.

In view of the above, you are requested to take further follow up action accordingly in the matter under intimation to this Department.

Yours faithfully, Additional Secretary to Government”

4.

When the matter stood thus, the leaned trial Court vide, its impugned order dated 11.07.2019, took cognizance of offences as mentioned above. The learned trial court was alive to the fact that sanction sought by the prosecution from the Department for the