Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dr. Ramchandra S/o Munjaji Bhise, was working as Vice Principal of Digambarrao Bindu Arts and Commerce College at Bhokar, District Nanded. On 30th June 2015, a student named Sunil Bhaurao Madilwad approached the Anti Corruption Bureau, Nanded, complaining that the petitioner had demanded a bribe for admission to the Yashwantrao Chavan Maharashtra Open University study center run at the college. Based on this complaint, an FIR bearing Crime No.25/2015 was registered at Bhokar Police Station against the petitioner for offenses under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner filed the present petition seeking quashment of the FIR on the ground that no valid sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was obtained prior to the registration of the FIR. The court examined the definition of 'public servant' under Section 2(c) of the Act and held that the petitioner, being a Vice Principal of a college which is a study center of an Open University, falls within the ambit of a public servant. The court further held that sanction under Section 19 is mandatory for prosecution of a public servant and its absence renders the prosecution invalid. Consequently, the court quashed the FIR and all proceedings arising therefrom.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 19 - Mandatory Sanction - The court considered whether the FIR against the petitioner, a Vice Principal of a college, could be quashed for lack of valid sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The court held that the petitioner being a public servant, sanction under Section 19 is mandatory and its absence renders the prosecution invalid. (Paras 1-10) B) Criminal Law - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Public Servant - Definition - Section 2(c) - The court examined whether the petitioner, a Vice Principal of a college, falls within the definition of a public servant under Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The court held that the petitioner, being an employee of a college which is a study center of an Open University, is a public servant as per the definition. (Paras 3-8) C) Criminal Law - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Quashing of FIR - Lack of Sanction - The court held that the FIR registered against the petitioner for offenses under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, is liable to be quashed as no valid sanction under Section 19 was obtained prior to registration. (Paras 9-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR registered against the petitioner, a Vice Principal of a college, for offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, can be quashed for want of valid sanction under Section 19 of the said Act.
Final Decision
The court quashed the FIR bearing Crime No.25/2015 registered at Bhokar Police Station and all proceedings arising therefrom.
Law Points
- Sanction under Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988 is mandatory for prosecution of a public servant
- quashing of FIR for lack of valid sanction
- public servant definition includes Vice Principal of a college
