Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to the Adarsh Cooperative Housing Society scam, where government land admeasuring about 3758 sq.mtrs in Block-VI at Colaba, Mumbai, which was in possession of the Army and used as 'Khukri Park', was allegedly allotted to the society through a conspiracy. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed a chargesheet against 12 accused, including respondent No.2, Ashok Shankarrao Chavan (former Chief Minister of Maharashtra), who was accused No.11. The CBI filed an application (Exh.46) before the Special Judge, Greater Mumbai, seeking to delete the name of respondent No.2 from the chargesheet and close the case against him. However, the Special Judge allowed the application and dropped the charges against respondent No.2 on the ground that no sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 had been obtained for his prosecution. The CBI challenged this order by filing a criminal revision application before the Bombay High Court. The High Court heard the matter and dismissed the revision application, holding that the Special Judge had not committed any error of jurisdiction or illegality. The court emphasized that sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act is mandatory for prosecuting a public servant, and its absence vitiates the proceedings. The court also noted that the CBI had itself sought to delete the name of the accused, and the Special Judge merely allowed that application. Therefore, the revision was dismissed as devoid of merit.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Revision - Maintainability - Section 397 Cr.P.C. - The revision application against the order dropping charges against accused No.11 was dismissed as the CBI failed to show any error of jurisdiction or illegality in the impugned order. The Special Judge correctly held that sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was mandatory and its absence rendered the prosecution invalid. (Paras 1-10) B) Prevention of Corruption Act - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 19 - Mandatory Requirement - The court held that sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is a prerequisite for prosecution of a public servant. Since no sanction was obtained for prosecuting accused No.11, the proceedings against him were rightly dropped. (Paras 5-8) C) Criminal Procedure - Chargesheet - Dropping of Accused - Section 173 Cr.P.C. - The Special Judge has the power to drop charges against an accused if the chargesheet does not disclose any offence or if prosecution is barred by law. The order dropping accused No.11 was justified as the CBI had not obtained the requisite sanction. (Paras 4-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Special Judge erred in allowing the application of accused No.11 (Ashok Shankarrao Chavan) for dropping his name from the chargesheet and closing the case against him on the ground of lack of sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the criminal revision application, upholding the order of the Special Judge dropping charges against respondent No.2 (Ashok Shankarrao Chavan) due to lack of sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Law Points
- Sanction for prosecution under Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988 is mandatory
- Lack of sanction vitiates proceedings
- Revision against dropping of charges is not maintainable if no error of jurisdiction
- CBI cannot challenge order dropping charges without obtaining sanction
