Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2011 (7) TMI 1398

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 992. It led to registration of a first information report against the Appellant. During the investigation, it was found that the Appellant possessed disproportionate assets of Rs. 5,58,752.40. As the Appellant was removable from service by the State Government, the Vigilance Department sought its sanction for prosecution of the Appellant. The State Government by its letter dated 13th May, 1997, declined to grant sanction and advised that the proposal for prosecuting the Appellant be dropped. The Appellant superannuated from service on 30th June, 1997. It seems that even after the retirement of the Appellant, the Vigilance Department wrote on 25th of March, 1998 for reconsideration of the earlier order refusing the sanction for prosecution o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llant to raise this contention before Special Judge (Vig.) at the time of the framing of the charge. 3. Appellant, thereafter filed an application for discharge before the trial court which dismissed the same by order dated 9th June, 2004 inter alia on the ground that the Appellant having retired from service, prior sanction is not necessary. Appellant challenged the aforesaid order before the High Court which by the impugned order rejected the challenge and while doing so observed as follows: 6. On a conspectus of the facts and circumstances involved in the case and the position of law in the matter of sanction vis- -vis the impugned order, this Court does not find any illegality in that order so as to invoke the inherent power with .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ccepting the broad submission of Mr. Tripathi that once the public servant ceases to be so on the date when the Court takes cognizance of the offence, there is no requirement of sanction under the Prevention of Corruption Act. However, the position is different in a case where Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has application. In fact, the submission advanced finds support from the judgment of this Court in the case of N. Bhargavan Pillai (dead) by L.Rs. and Anr. v. State of Kerala AIR 2004 SC 2317 where it has been held as follows: 8. The correct legal position, therefore, is that an accused facing prosecution for offences under the Old Act or New Act cannot claim any immunity on the ground of want of sanction, if he ceased .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to the pressure of unscrupulous elements. It is a weapon at the hands of the sanctioning authority to protect the innocent public servants from uncalled for prosecution but not intended to shield the guilty. Here in the present case while the Appellant was in service sanction sought for his prosecution was declined by the State Government. Vigilance Department did not challenge the same and allowed the Appellant to retire from service. After the retirement, Vigilance Department requested the State Government to reconsider its decision, which was not only refused but the State Government while doing so clearly observed that no prima-facie case of disproportionate assets against the Appellant is made out. Notwithstanding that Vigilance Depar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on wrote to the Director of Vigilance (Investigation) along with a copy of Ext. P-I report. The Director of Vigilance (Investigation) sanctioned registration of a case. On the basis of the direction the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Kollam (PW-10) registered a case as per Ext. P-39. He entrusted the investigation to Inspector of the Kollam Vigilance Unit-I (PW-11), who conducted the investigation and sent a report to his higher authorities. In the meantime, the accused retired from service on 28-2-1992. Since he had retired from service sanction for prosecution became unnecessary. The case was transferred to the newly established Pathanamthitta Vigilance Unit. PW-12, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Pathana .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates