JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.-Leave granted.

2. The scope and ambit of Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short the Act ) falls for consideration in this appeal, State of Karnataka calls in question legality of the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court. The High Court upheld the order of discharge passed by the trial Court. The respondent-accused was discharged in a criminal trial by the said order.

3. Background facts necessary for disposal of the appeal in a nutshell are as follows :

A charge-sheet was filed against the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the Accused ) for commission of offences relatable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Act. Charges were framed by the Trial Court under the aforesaid provisions. Evidence of witnesses had also been recorded. At that stage the public prosecutor filed an application stating that in view of some earlier judgments of the High Court, question relating to validating a sanction for prosecution was to be adjudicated first. The accused had no objection to it. Undisputedly, the sanction was accorded by the Superintending Engineer of the Karnataka Electricity Boa