Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shankarappa K A S, was a public servant working as Assistant Commissioner in the Revenue Department, Government of Karnataka. A trap was laid by Lokayukta police alleging that he was taking a bribe, but the trap was not successful as there was no positive finding regarding hand wash. After investigation, the Lokayukta police sought sanction from the Government to prosecute the accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Government rejected the sanction by a considered order dated 8.12.2009, at which time the accused was still a public servant. Despite the rejection, the Lokayukta police filed a charge sheet after the petitioner retired from service, and the trial court took cognizance of the offences. The petitioner filed a criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with 401 Cr.P.C. challenging the order taking cognizance. The legal issue was whether a public servant can be prosecuted after retirement when sanction was rejected while he was in service. The court analyzed Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which requires prior sanction for prosecution of a public servant. The court held that once the sanction was rejected, it could not be revived after the accused ceased to be a public servant. The prosecution could not proceed without valid sanction. The court allowed the revision petition, set aside the order taking cognizance, and quashed the proceedings in Spl. Case No.38/2010 pending before the District and Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagar.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 19 - Rejection of Sanction - Effect of Retirement - The issue was whether a public servant can be prosecuted after retirement when sanction was rejected while he was in service. The court held that once sanction is rejected, it cannot be revived after the accused ceases to be a public servant, and prosecution cannot proceed without valid sanction. (Paras 2-6) B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Revision - Section 397 - Maintainability - The revision petition was filed against an order taking cognizance despite rejection of sanction. The court held that the order was illegal and liable to be set aside. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a public servant can be prosecuted for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, after attaining the age of superannuation or voluntary retirement in the light of the rejection of the plea for according sanction by the Government while he was in service?
Final Decision
The court allowed the criminal revision petition, set aside the order dated 25.07.2015 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagar in Spl. Case No.38/2010, and quashed the proceedings in Spl. Case No.38/2010.
Law Points
- Sanction for prosecution under Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988 must be obtained while the accused is a public servant
- rejection of sanction cannot be revived after retirement
- Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988
