Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.S.GADKARI, RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ.
Mr. Tanaji Balasaheb Gambhire - Appellant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 4680 of 2021
Decided On : 02-04-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. corruption erodes society; strict pc act enforcement needed. (Para 2) |
| 2. petition challenges orders protecting alleged corrupt engineer. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. authority exceeded s17a powers; ignored non-cooperation. (Para 5) |
| 4. competent authority properly refused approval after review. (Para 6) |
| 5. s17a inapplicable to disproportionate assets cases. (Para 7) |
| 6. scope of s17a: no pre-investigation merits review. (Para 8) |
| 7. s17a excludes disproportionate assets; prima facie sufficient. (Para 9) |
| 8. pc act safeguards investigation by authorized officers. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 9. s17a approval only for official decisions, not da. (Para 13) |
| 10. distinguish approval from sanction; no mini-trial. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 11. enquiry integrity demands investigation on suspicion. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 12. non-cooperation warrants open enquiry in da case. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 13. authority improperly investigated, protected non-cooperator. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 14. orders exceed jurisdiction; wrongly applied s17a. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 15. prima facie case suffices for approval; judicious discretion. (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 16. s17a inapplicable; quash orders, proceed enquiry. (Para 32) |
| 17. set aside impugned orders and closures. (Para 33 , 34) |
| 18. judgment stayed two weeks for appeal. (Para 35) |
JUDGMENT :
RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.
1) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the parties.
2) The Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Subramanian Swamy V. Director, C.B.I reported in (2014) 8 SCC 682, taking very serious note of the level of corruption prevailing in the country and the objects of enacting the Prevention of Corruption Act, has observed as under:
“72. Corruption is an enemy of nation and tracking down corrupt public servant, howsoever high he may be, and punishing such person is a necessary mandate under the PC Act, 1988. The status or position of public servant does not qualify such public servant from exemption from equal treatment. The decision-making power does not segregate corrupt officers into two classes as they are common crimedoers and have to be tracked down by the same process of inquiry and investigation.
75. Corruption corrodes the moral fabric of the society and corruption by public servants not only leads to corrosion of the moral fabric of the society but is also harmful to the national economy and national interest, as the persons occupying high posts in the Government by misusing their power due to corruption can cause considerable damage to the national economy, national interest and image of the country.
81.……..In the supplementing judgment, A.K. Ganguly, J. while concurring with the main judgment delivered by G.S. Singhvi, J. observed: (Subramanian Swamy case22 , SCC p. 100, para 68)
“68. Today, corruption in our country not only poses a grave danger to the concept of constitutional governance, it also threatens the very foundation of the Indian democracy and the rule of law. The magnitude of corruption in our public life is incompatible with the concept of a socialist secular democratic republic. It cannot be disputed that where corruption begins all rights end. Corruption devalues human rights, chokes development and undermines justice, liberty, equality, fraternity which are the core values in our Preambular vision. Therefore, the duty of the court is that any anti-corruption law has to be interpreted and worked out in such a fashion as to strengthen the fight against corruption.”
3) By the present Petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks to challenge the impugned Orders dated 16th April 2019 and 25th April 2019 passed by the Respondent No. 4 Municipal Commissioner, Pune Municipal Corporation. The Petitioner further seeks directions to the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to conduct the open enquiry into the allegations of corrupt practice by Mr. Prashant Waghmare, as more particularly stated in the Petitioner’s complaint dated 18
Section 17A PC Act inapplicable to disproportionate assets cases; previous approval only for offences linked to official recommendations/decisions. Competent authority cannot investigate merits or de....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 17A of the PC Act, 1988, which restricts the requirement of prior approval for initiating enquiry/....
Enquiry or Inquiry or investigation of offences decision taken by public servant in discharge of official functions or duties - Once a constitutional court examines and satisfies itself about necessi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of prior approval for investigation under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended, and its implications f....
Point of law: Prevention of corruption – Good faith - Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act cannot be made applicable in those cases where the act of the public servant that amounts to an o....
It becomes imperative for authority to apply its mind to what is brought before it, as application of mind is bedrock of any order that an authority passes, failing which, it would be contrary to pri....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that section 17-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act does not apply to an investigation completed prior to its introduction on the statute book. T....
The court affirmed the necessity of obtaining prior approval for investigating public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act, ensuring timely and proper inquiries without undue influence.
Persons authorised to investigate - Misappropriation of funds - Scope of S. 17A - An approval under S. 17A for conducting any enquiry, inquiry or investigation was warranted only when act done by acc....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
