SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 863

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, K.S.PARIPOORNAN
State Through Anti Corruption Bureau, Government Of Maharashtra, Bombay – Appellant
Versus
Krishanchand Khushalchand Jagtiani – Respondent


JUDGMENT

B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.-Leave granted. Heard counsel for the parties.

2. Respondent, K.K. Jagtiani, was an Assistant Engineer in the service of the Municipal Corporation, Greater Bombay. On the basis of a complaint received, a trap was laid. The respondent was caught accepting the money. The Municipal Commissioner granted sanction for prosecuting the respondent and another employee under Seciton 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (the Act) and Sections 161 and 165 of the Indian Penal Code on January 4, 1988. On that date, the respondent was in receipt of basic minimum salary which was less than Rupees twelve hundred per month. In due course, a charge-sheet was filed against the respondent in the court of Special Judge, Greater Bombay under Sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Act and Sections 161 and 165 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Special Judge took cognizance of the offences and framed charges. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the sanction granted by the Municipal Commissioner without obtaining the previous approval of the Standing Committee of the Corporation is not valid and competent in law inasmuch as the Municipal Commissioner by himsel


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top