Cognizance of offences against public servants requires prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC and Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, failing which the cognizance is illegal.

Order :

(Arvind Kumar Verma, J.)

1. The instant revision has been filed under Section 438 read with Section 422 BNSS, 2023 against the order dated 01/02/2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (PC Act), Raipur, C.G. whereby the cognizance has been taken in for the offences in FIR No.01/2024 against the petitioner.

2. The brief facts of this case are that:-

- On 16.01.2024, the ACB/ EOW, Raipur registered an FIR bearing no. 01/2024 for commission of offences u/S 120B and 409 IPC andSection 13(1)(a) and Section 13(2) read with Section 11 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 (as amended) inter alia arraigning the Petitioner as an accused.

- On 01.02.2025, the Respondent filed the Subject Charge-sheet in the Subject FIR. Notably, it has specifically been stated by the Respondent in the charge-sheet that an application for sanction to prosecute the Petitioner has been made to the State Government.

- On the same day, i.e., 01.02.2025, the Ld. Trial Court passed the Impugned Order, thereby taking cognizance of the alleged offences, without awaiting the necessary sanction u/s. 19 PC Act or under Section 197 Cr.P.C. from the appropriate authority for prosecution of the Petitioner. Hence this petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that:-

(a) at the time of passing the order on 01/02/2025 where cognizance of the offence of money laundering was taken, no sanction u/s 197(1) CrPC or u/s 218(1) BNSS was obtained by the Respondent/ED for prosecution of the Petitioner, despite the fact that the petitioner was a Public Servant at the time of the commission of the alleged offence and despite the mandatory requirement for obtaining such a sanction in terms of Section 197(1) CrPC and Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(b) He would next contend that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has recently held in the case of Enforcement Directorate v. Bibhu Prasad Acharya, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3181 and declared the law that the Sanction under Section 197(1), CrPC for prosecution of inter alia a Public Servant must have been obtained prior to taking cognizance of the offence of money laundering u/s 3 of the PMLA as well.

(c) He would next contend that in the subject FIR, the Respondent/ ED has alleged that the Petitioner, who was the MD, MARKFED at the time of commission of the alleged offences, had issued directions to DMOs and employees of MARKFED to clear bills of only those rice millers who had paid the incentive amount to Roshan Chandrakar, and intentionally kept pending/ delayed files of those rice millers who refused to pay the extortion amount. Thus, the protection under Section 197(1), CrPC as well as under Section 19 of the PC Act extends to the Petitioner and the Ld. Trial Court erred in taking cognizance against the Petitioner without the Respondent/ED having obtained previous sanction u/s 197(1), CrPC.

(d) He placed his reliance in the law laid dowy by the Supreme Court in the matters of Prakash Singh Badal & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Ors., (2007) 1 SCC 1; P.K. Pradhan v. State of Sikkim, (2001) 6 SCC 704; Bibhu Prasad Acharya, (supra) and would submit that the impugned order taking cognizance of the offence as alleged in the subject FIR without prosecution sanction taking cognizance by the special judge is per se illegal, therefore, the same may be set aside with respect to the petitioner.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the Respondent would contend that:-

(A) So far as the prosecution sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is concerned, in this regard it is submitted that the Government of Chhattisgarh, General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, has already sent a letter to the Director, Staff, Government of India, Ministry of Communication, Department of Telecommunication, New Delhi, regarding prosecution sanction against the present petitioner in connection with Crime No.01/2024, registered under Sections 384, 409 and 120-B of the IPC and under S