Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, who were employees of a public sector undertaking, filed a writ petition challenging the sanction for prosecution granted under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. They were accused of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code. The sanction was granted by the competent authority after considering the FIR, statements of witnesses, and other documents. The petitioners contended that the sanction was invalid because they were not supplied with copies of the documents relied upon by the sanctioning authority, and that the authority did not apply its mind. The High Court examined the sanction order and found that it recorded the application of mind by the authority. The court held that there is no requirement under Section 19 to supply documents to the accused before granting sanction, and that the authority had considered the relevant material. The court also noted that the writ petition was filed after the charge sheet was submitted, but entertained it on merits. Dismissing the petition, the court held that the sanction was valid and the prosecution could proceed.
Headnote
A) Prevention of Corruption Act - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 19 - Application of Mind - Sanctioning authority must apply its mind to the material on record before granting sanction; mere non-supply of documents to the accused does not vitiate the sanction if the authority has considered the relevant material. Held that the sanction order in this case was valid as the authority had perused the FIR, statements, and other documents. (Paras 5-8) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Writ Jurisdiction - Maintainability - High Court may entertain a writ petition challenging sanction for prosecution even after charge sheet is filed, but only in exceptional circumstances where the sanction is patently invalid. Held that the present petition did not disclose any such exceptional circumstances. (Para 9) C) Prevention of Corruption Act - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 19 - Opportunity of Hearing - There is no requirement under Section 19 to give a hearing to the accused before granting sanction. Held that the petitioners' grievance regarding non-supply of documents was without merit. (Paras 6-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the sanction for prosecution granted under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is invalid due to non-supply of documents to the petitioners and lack of application of mind by the sanctioning authority.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the sanction for prosecution was valid and the prosecution could proceed.
Law Points
- Sanction for prosecution under Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988 requires application of mind by sanctioning authority
- non-supply of documents does not vitiate sanction if authority considered material
- writ petition against sanction not maintainable after charge sheet filed
