Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri K M Nataraj, the Additional Advocate General of Karnataka, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of the order dated 29.9.2012 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Bangalore Rural District, in PCR No.7/2012, and all further proceedings pursuant thereto insofar as the petitioner is concerned. The respondents 1 to 8, who were the complainants, had filed a private complaint against the petitioner and others alleging offences under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Special Judge took cognizance of the offences and issued process against the petitioner. The petitioner contended that he is a public servant and that the alleged acts were performed in the discharge of his official duties. Therefore, prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC and Section 19 of the PC Act was mandatory before taking cognizance. The respondents 1 to 8 remained unrepresented despite service, while respondent No.9, the Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta, was represented by counsel. The court, after hearing the petitioner's counsel and the counsel for respondent No.9, held that the order taking cognizance was illegal and without jurisdiction as no sanction had been obtained. The court quashed the order dated 29.9.2012 in PCR No.7/2012 and all further proceedings against the petitioner. The petition was allowed accordingly.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 197 CrPC - Public Servant - Order taking cognizance against Additional Advocate General without sanction under Section 197 CrPC is illegal and liable to be quashed - Held that no court can take cognizance of an offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant in discharge of official duties without prior sanction (Paras 4-6). B) Prevention of Corruption Act - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 19 PC Act - Special Judge - Cognizance of offence under PC Act without sanction under Section 19 is barred - Held that the Special Judge cannot take cognizance of offences under the PC Act without previous sanction from the competent authority (Paras 4-6). C) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of Proceedings - Section 482 CrPC - Inherent Powers - High Court can quash proceedings where cognizance is taken without mandatory sanction - Held that the order dated 29.9.2012 in PCR No.7/2012 is quashed as it suffers from lack of sanction (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order taking cognizance against the petitioner, a public servant, without prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC and Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The order dated 29.9.2012 passed in PCR No.7/2012 by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, and all further proceedings pursuant thereto insofar as the petitioner is concerned, are quashed.
Law Points
- Sanction for prosecution of public servant
- Section 197 CrPC
- Section 19 Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988
- Cognizance of offence by Special Judge
- Private complaint against public servant
