{"id":254869,"date":"2021-09-29T12:00:34","date_gmt":"2021-09-29T06:30:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=254869"},"modified":"2021-09-30T18:10:07","modified_gmt":"2021-09-30T12:40:07","slug":"interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Chh HC | Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Chhattisgarh High Court: <\/strong>Sanjay K Agrawal, J. dismissed the petition being devoid of merits.<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #333300;\"><strong>Facts<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The facts of the case are such that the Chhattisgarh State Economic Crime Bureau and Anti Corruption Bureau registered an offence against the petitioner and other persons for offence under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act i.e. PC Act and Sections 120B &amp; 420 of the Penal Code, 1860 i.e. IPC and sought sanction from respondent 1 for prosecution against the petitioner herein and other persons under Section 19(1)(b) of the PC Act and Section 197 of Criminal Procedure Code i.e. CrPC. The petitioner herein calls in question legality, validity and correctness of the impugned order dated 15-5-2019 passed by respondent No.1 in exercise of power conferred under Section 19(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, \u2018the PC Act\u2019) read with Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, \u2018the CrPC\u2019) granting sanction for prosecution against him for offence under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act and Sections 120B &amp; 420 of the IPC.<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #333300;\"><strong>Issue <\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The sanction for prosecution ought to have been placed before the Sub- Committee of the Cabinet, as the Administrative Department has not accorded sanction for prosecution of the petitioner modified by subsequent circular. Since that procedure was not followed by respondent 1, the order granting sanction is illegal and liable to be set-aside<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the order granting sanction is illegal, contrary to law and deserves to be set-aside because if there is difference of opinion between two Departments of the State i.e. parent Department, here Water Resources Department and the Law Department, then the procedure laid down in the circular and its clarification issued by the State Government is required to be followed. It was further submitted that sanction can only be obtained in coordination with the Minister of Council of Political Affairs or with its concurrence and no such procedure has been followed in the present case.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court perused section 19 of PC Act and stated that previous sanction for prosecution is required in respect of a public servant who is employed and is not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the State Government. The Court observed that the communication of alleged disagreement with respect to grant of sanction qua the petitioner has been made by the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Raipur to the Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Water Resources Department dated after the order granting sanction for prosecution under Section 19 of the PC Act and Section 197 of the CrPC was passed, whereas the disagreement was required to be expressed and to be sent by the Administrative Department before the question of sanction is considered by Respondent 1 herein.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court relied on judgment <em>Subramanian Swamy v. Manmohan Singh<\/em>, (2012) 3 SCC 64 and observed despite memo and reminder received by the Administrative Department \u2013 respondent 2, no response was served to respondent 1 who is the competent authority to consider the issue of grant of sanction and therefore in absence of any disagreement, the competent authority to grant sanction being the Department of Law &amp; Legislative Affairs has proceeded to consider the matter and issued order granting sanction for prosecution against the petitioner and others. It was further established that despite memo dated 22-3-2019 reiterated by reminder dated 25-4- 2019, the Administrative Department kept pin-drop silence over the matter.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court further relied on judgment State of <em>Madhya Pradesh v. Virender Kumar<\/em> <em>Tripathi<\/em>, (2009) 15 SCC 533 and observed that interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order will not be appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned by any such error, omission or irregularity in the sanction and such failure of justice can be established not at the stage of framing of charge but only after the trial has commenced and the evidence is led.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court held <em>\u201cultimately, finding no opinion of the Administrative Department (respondent 2) either way, the Department of Law &amp; Legislative Affairs being the authority competent to grant sanction has rightly considered the issue and granted sanction for prosecution against the petitioner\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">[KK Vashishta v. State of Chhattisgarh, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/oX2HHer0\"><b>2021 SCC OnLine Chh 621<\/b><\/a>, decided on 15-03-2021]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><span style=\"color: #333300;\">Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.<\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Appearances:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For Petitioner: Mr. B.P. Sharma and Mr. M.L. Sakat<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For Respondents \/ State: &#8211; Mr. Jitendra Pali and Mr. Ravi Kumar Bhagat<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Chhattisgarh High Court: Sanjay K Agrawal, J. dismissed the petition being devoid of merits. Facts The facts of the case are such <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[47283,18591,2673,30517,47278,33675,36202,14261,10521,2675,47277,47279,47280,47281,33118,47282],"class_list":["post-254869","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-chhattisgarh-state-economic-crime-bureau","tag-code-of-criminal-procedure","tag-corruption","tag-criminal-proceeding","tag-department-of-law-legislative-affairs","tag-failure-of-justice","tag-memo","tag-penal-code","tag-prevention-of-corruption","tag-public_servant","tag-sanction-order","tag-sec-19-3-pc-act","tag-section-131d-pc-act","tag-section-132-pc-act","tag-section-420-ipc","tag-sections-120b-ipc"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Chh HC | Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chh HC | Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-09-29T06:30:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-09-30T12:40:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/chattisgarh_high_court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/\",\"name\":\"Chh HC | Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-09-29T06:30:34+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-09-30T12:40:07+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chh HC | Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Chh HC | Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act | SCC Times","description":"Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chh HC | Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act","og_description":"Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-09-29T06:30:34+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-09-30T12:40:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/chattisgarh_high_court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/","name":"Chh HC | Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-09-29T06:30:34+00:00","dateModified":"2021-09-30T12:40:07+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chh HC | Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":313268,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/06\/bombay-hc-quash-rs-150-bribe-case-primary-school-junior-clerk-lack-previous-sanction-under-pc-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":254869,"position":0},"title":"Bombay HC quashes Rs 150 bribe case against Primary School Junior Clerk for want of previous sanction under PC Act","author":"Ridhi","date":"February 6, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court explained that the instant case did not pertain to defective sanction.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"bombay high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":299129,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/effect-on-trial-for-offences-under-ipc-if-sanction-under-pc-act-declined-sc-highlights-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":254869,"position":1},"title":"How Trial for offences under IPC would be affected if Sanction for offences under PC Act is declined? SC Highlights","author":"Editor","date":"August 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cSanction contemplated under Section 197 of the CrPC concerns a public servant who \u2018is accused of any offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty\u2019 whereas, the offences contemplated in the PC Act, 1988 are those which\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"sanction under pc act declined","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/sanction-under-pc-act-declined.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/sanction-under-pc-act-declined.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/sanction-under-pc-act-declined.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/sanction-under-pc-act-declined.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":357713,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/25\/ker-hc-clarifies-competent-authority-for-sanction-for-prosecution-under-s-ipc-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":254869,"position":2},"title":"Understanding Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act: Kerala HC explains \u2018competent authority\u2019 for grant of previous sanction","author":"Editor","date":"August 25, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cMerely because the power of appointment and removal was delegated to the Administrator, he could not be held as the competent authority to remove the accused, who was appointed prior to the delegation by the President\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"previous sanction for prosecution","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/previous-sanction-for-prosecution.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/previous-sanction-for-prosecution.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/previous-sanction-for-prosecution.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/previous-sanction-for-prosecution.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":370205,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/12\/18\/mere-recovery-of-tainted-money-insufficient-for-conviction-under-pc-act-bom-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":254869,"position":3},"title":"Mere recovery of tainted money insufficient for conviction under PC Act: Bombay HC acquits officials of all charges","author":"Sunaina","date":"December 18, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cOffences under the PC Act require strict proof of twin elements of demand and acceptance and mere recovery of tainted currency or existence of electronic recordings, without reliable proof of demand, is insufficient to convict unless accompanied by credible proof of demand.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"mere recovery of tainted money insufficient for conviction","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/mere-recovery-of-tainted-money-insufficient-for-conviction.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/mere-recovery-of-tainted-money-insufficient-for-conviction.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/mere-recovery-of-tainted-money-insufficient-for-conviction.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/mere-recovery-of-tainted-money-insufficient-for-conviction.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":373390,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/sc-jurisdiction-to-investigate-prevention-of-corruption-offences\/","url_meta":{"origin":254869,"position":4},"title":"State Police or its specialised agency can investigate Prevention of Corruption Act offences against Central Government Employees: Supreme Court","author":"Ritu","date":"January 21, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) is also a wing of State Police. The offences under the PC Act are also cognizable and can, therefore, be investigated by the State Police or VACB.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"jurisdiction to investigate Prevention of Corruption offences","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/jurisdiction-to-investigate-Prevention-of-Corruption-offences.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/jurisdiction-to-investigate-Prevention-of-Corruption-offences.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/jurisdiction-to-investigate-Prevention-of-Corruption-offences.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/jurisdiction-to-investigate-Prevention-of-Corruption-offences.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":326585,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/15\/sc-refuses-to-quash-cbi-disproportionate-assets-case-against-dk-shivakumar\/","url_meta":{"origin":254869,"position":5},"title":"Supreme Court refuses to quash CBI disproportionate assets case against Karnataka Deputy CM DK Shivakumar","author":"Editor","date":"July 15, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Income Tax Authorities conducted a raid at DK Shivakumar\u2019s house and allegedly recovered Rs.8,59,69,100\/- and CBI registered an FIR for offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Hot Off The Press&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"DK Shivakumar","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/DK-Shivakumar.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/DK-Shivakumar.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/DK-Shivakumar.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/DK-Shivakumar.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/254869","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=254869"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/254869\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=254869"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=254869"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=254869"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}