Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Rajendra Gangadhar Rane, a Range Forest Officer, filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the sanction order dated 17-09-2014 passed by the State of Maharashtra (Revenue and Forest Department) according sanction for his prosecution under Section 19(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner was an accused in Crime No.3002 of 2010 registered at Muktai Nagar Police Station, Jalgaon, for offences under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The case arose from a complaint filed by one Tukaram Govind Sonawane on 16-01-2010 with the Anti Corruption Bureau, Dhule, alleging demand of bribe. A trap was laid, and a Class-IV employee, Ashok Dayaram Tayade, was caught accepting Rs.10,000/- from the complainant. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated and had never demanded any amount; rather, he had filed a case against the complainant for illegal cutting and transportation of forest produce. The petitioner argued that the sanction order was passed mechanically without application of mind. The court, after hearing the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent, found that the sanction order did not reflect due application of mind by the sanctioning authority. Consequently, the court quashed the sanction order dated 17-09-2014 and allowed the petition.
Headnote
A) Prevention of Corruption Act - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 19(1)(b) - Validity of Sanction Order - The court examined whether the sanction order was passed after due application of mind. The court held that the sanctioning authority must independently apply its mind to all material evidence before granting sanction. In the present case, the sanction order was found to be mechanical and without proper application of mind, as it did not reflect consideration of the evidence on record. (Paras 1-3) B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India - Quashing of Sanction Order - The court exercised its constitutional powers to quash the sanction order dated 17-09-2014 passed by respondent No.1, as the order suffered from non-application of mind and was therefore invalid. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the sanction order dated 17-09-2014 granted under Section 19(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for prosecution of the petitioner is valid and sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The sanction order dated 17-09-2014 passed by respondent No.1 is quashed and set aside.
Law Points
- Sanction for prosecution under Prevention of Corruption Act must be granted after due application of mind
- Sanction order must reflect consideration of all material evidence
- Non-application of mind renders sanction order invalid
