Sonia Gokani, J.

1. At the outset, this Court palpates to regurgitate the relevant observations of the Apex Court in the latest decision in the case of State of Karnataka, etc. v. Selvi J. Jayalalitha and others, etc., while dealing with Criminal Appeal Nos. 300-303 of 2017 and allied matters, wherein the Apex Court has expressed its extreme concern over the issue of corruption in the country in different context of possession of disproportionate assets by the former Chief Minister of the State of Tamil Nadu and the co-accused Shashikala, as under:

"(Per : Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.)

xxx xxx xxx

Approach of Court in PC Cases

166. Qua the required orientation of a Court vis-à-vis offences under the Act, it has been inter alia emphatically observed in State of M.P. & Ors. v. Ram Singh, (2000) 5 SCC 88, that corruption in a civilized society is a disease like cancer, which if not detected in time is sure to afflict the polity of the country leading to disastrous consequences. It was ruled that corruption is like a plague which is not only contagious but if not controlled spreads like fire in a jungle. It was proclaimed that corruption is opposed to democracy and social order, being not only anti people but aimed and targeted against them. It affects the economy and destroys the cultural heritage and therefore, unless it is nipped in the bud at the earliest, it is likely to cause turbulence, shaking the socio-economic-political system in an otherwise healthy, wealthy, effective and vibrating society.

167. The history of the enactment of the 1947 Act was traced in R.S. Nayak v. A.R. Antulay, (1984) 2 SCC 183 and a caveat was sounded to the effect that whenever a question of construction arises upon ambiguity or if two views are possible of a provision of an anti corruption law (then Act 1947), it would be the duty of the Court to adopt that construction which would advance the object underlying the statute, namely to make effective the provision for the prevention of bribery and corruption and at any rate not to defeat it. It was underscored that procedural delays and technicalities of law should not be permitted to defeat the object sought to be achieved by the statute and the overall public interest and the social object is to be borne in mind while interpreting the various provisions thereof and in deciding cases under the same.

(Emphasis supplied)

168. In Niranjan Hemchandra Sashittal & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra, (2013) 4 SCC 642, this Court while dwelling on the same theme, exposited as hereinbelow:

"It can be stated without any fear of contradiction that corruption is not to be judged by decree, for corruption mothers disorder, destroys societal will to progress, accelerates undeserved ambitions, kills the conscience, jettisons the glory of the institutions, paralyses the economic health of a country, corrodes the sense of civility and mars the marrows of governance. It is worth noting that immoral acquisition of wealth destroys the energy of the people believing in honesty, and history records with agony how they have suffered. The only redeeming fact is that collective sensibility respects such suffering as it is in consonance with the constitutional morality."

169. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Subramanian Swamy v. Director, Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., (2014) 8 SCC 682, reiterated that corruption is an enemy of the nation and tracking down corrupt public servants and punishing such persons is a necessary mandate of the Act 1988."

xxx xxx xxx

(Per : Amitava Roy, J.)

xxx xxx xxx

5. Corruption is a vice of insatiable avarice for self-aggrandizement by the unscrupulous, taking unfair advantage of their power and authority and those in public office also, in breach of the institutional norms, mostly backed by minatory loyalists. Both the corrupt and the corrupter are indictable and answerable to the society and the country as a whole. This is more particularly in re the peoples' representatives in public life c