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

2004 Supreme(Ker) 404

J.M.JAMES, J.B.KOSHY
Krishna Iyer – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala, represented by Superintendent of Police – Respondent


Judgment :-

Koshy, J.

Whether Secretary of the Vigilance Department can grant sanction under section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for taking cognizance of offences against officers who are working under other departments is the question of law referred by the learned single Judge in these appeals. In all these cases charge sheets were issued before the introduction of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and charges were framed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2. Section 6 of the Act reads as follows:

“6. Previous sanction necessary for prosecution.--- (1) No court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 161 or section 164 or section 165 of the Indian penal Code or under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3A) of Section 5 of this Act, alleged to have been committed by a public servant except with the previous sanction, --

(a) in the case of a person who is employed in connection with the affairs of the Union and is not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the Central Government;

(b) in the case of a person who is employed in connection with the affairs of a State and is not remova

























































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