Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Prakash Murlidhar Bhishikar, a retired IAS officer, served as Collector of Buldhana between 1993 and 1996. He was assigned the work of Adult Literacy Drive. The prosecution alleged that he, along with the District Literacy Officer and suppliers, indulged in corrupt practices by inflating the number of illiterate adults from the actual figure of 1,68,000 to 2,00,000, thereby purchasing material for 32,000 non-existent adults. A survey revealed the actual figure was 1,52,062, and with a 10% increase, it should have been 1,68,000. The applicant was charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He filed an application for discharge before the Special Judge, Buldhana, which was rejected on 25.9.2012. Aggrieved, he filed the present criminal revision. The core legal issue was whether the applicant, as a former public servant, was entitled to discharge for want of sanction under Section 197 CrPC. The applicant argued that all acts alleged were in discharge of official duty, and thus sanction was mandatory. The State opposed, contending that the acts were not in discharge of duty but were corrupt practices. The court analyzed the nature of the acts and found that the estimation of illiterate adults and purchase of material were directly connected with the applicant's official duty as Collector. The court held that the acts were integrally connected with the discharge of official duty, and therefore, prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC was mandatory. Since no sanction was obtained, the prosecution was barred by law. The court allowed the revision, set aside the order rejecting discharge, and discharged the applicant from the case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 197 CrPC - Public Servant - Acts in Discharge of Official Duty - The court considered whether the alleged acts of inflating literacy figures and purchasing material were in discharge of official duty. Held that the acts were integrally connected with official duty, and thus prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC was mandatory. (Paras 6-10) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Discharge - Section 227 CrPC - Bar to Prosecution - The court held that if prosecution is barred by law, the accused is entitled to discharge under Section 227 CrPC. Since no sanction was obtained, the prosecution was barred and discharge was warranted. (Paras 11-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicant, a former public servant, is entitled to discharge on the ground that the prosecution is barred for want of sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Final Decision
The court allowed the criminal revision application, set aside the order dated 25.9.2012 passed by the Special Judge, Buldhana, and discharged the applicant from Criminal Case No.5/2003.
Law Points
- Sanction under Section 197 CrPC is mandatory for prosecution of public servant for acts done in discharge of official duty
- Protection under Section 197 CrPC extends to former public servants for acts done while in office
- Discharge can be granted at any stage if prosecution is barred by law
