9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Prosecution without sanction u/s 197 of CrPC, legality of filing chargesheet after retirement, withdrawal of prosecution sanction, competence of authority granting sanction.
The appellant, a public servant, was prosecuted u/s 13(1)(a) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He contended that prosecution without sanction u/s 197 of CrPC was illegal as the State Government had not granted sanction for filing the criminal case against him. The State argued that filing the challan against the appellant post-retirement was not illegal. The application for discharge was dismissed based on the State's stance (para 3). The appellant, relying on a precedent, argued that if sanction is refused while in service, prosecution post-retirement is impermissible. The respondent conceded that the appellant's case fell under the cited precedent and acknowledged that the appellant's retirement rendered prosecution untenable. The Court, in line with the precedent, held in favor of the appellant, quashing the orders against him (para 6). In another case, the petitioner challenged proceedings u/s 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, citing lack of sanction for the accused controlling officers. The petitioner claimed that the earlier sanction was withdrawn based on subsequent resolutions. The Court noted the absence of provisions for withdrawal of sanction once granted and questioned the competence of the authority granting sanction. The petitioner was granted time to submit additional documents, and the matter was adjourned (para 9).
|
