K. B. SIDDAPPA, J. ( 1 ) THE revision is directed against the order passed in Crl. MP No. 735 of 1998 in Criminal No. 6/rc-WLR-ACB of 1995 dated 28-4-1999 on the file of the Special Judge for ACB Cases, visakhapatnam. The complainant filed the petition under Sections 451 and 457 of cr. PC, read with Section 3 of Criminal Law amendment Ordinance, 1944 to order prohibition of transfer of the assets standing in the name of the respondent-accused or his family members either by sale or by any other mode, pending further investigation in the case. ( 2 ) THE Inspector of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau who is the complainant gave all the details of the assets alleged to have been acquired by the accused. According to the prosecution, the said assets are suspected to have been ill gotten by indulging in corrupt practices by the accused. The Court after perusing the affidavit and the contents in the FIR and also the inventory report had passed the order dated 15-12-1998 ordering attachment of the schedule mentioned five items for a period of six months and gave notice to the respondent. ( 3 ) THE accused-respondent has filed the affidavit mainly contending that the acb Court has no jurisdiction since the case has not reached the stage of trial. This point was considered by the Court below and held that the ACB Court has got power to entertain the application and upheld the order of attachment. Hence the present revision. ( 4 ) HEARD Mr. C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned senior Counsel for the petitioner and mr. G. Pedda Babu, Standing Counsel for acb Cases. ( 5 ) MR. Padmanabha Reddy submitted that the case is still at the investigation stage and the Court below will get jurisdiction only when the cognizance of the offence is taken by the Court and also during the stage of the trial by virtue of Section 5 of the prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He further submitted that as per Section 4 of the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 only the District Judge has power to pass ad-interim attachment. In this case, as stated earlier, it is at the investigation stage and, therefore, only the District Judge has power to pass the order of interim attachment. ( 6 ) I do not agree with the above submissions. In this case, as stated earlier, it is at the investigation stage and, therefore, only the District Judge has power to pass the order of interim attachment. ( 6 ) I do not agree with the above submissions. Admittedly, the Special Court for ACB Cases is constituted with the jurisdiction specified in the annexure of the enactment. The properties sought to be attached are within the jurisdiction of the Special Judge for ACB Cases, visakhapatnam. Certainly the Special Judge has power to order attachment even in cases which are at the investigation stage. If literal meaning is given to the term district judge used in Section 3 of the Criminal law Amendment Ordinance, 1944, it would result in dichotomy of the jurisdiction and such interpretation is not called for. The Special Judge is of the rank of the district Judge. If he has power to order attachment during trial, certainly he has power to pass any order axillary to his powers even when the case is at the investigation stage. It is the ACB department which is dealing with the case and doing investigation and, therefore, only the special Judge has power to pass attachment of the property even at the stage of investigation as is done in this case. Interpretation given by the learned Special judge with regard to the harmonious construction is correct. Hence, there is no ground to interfere with the impugned order and the revision is accordingly dismissed.