Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN
Pramod Chandran M.C. S/o M. Chandrasekharan Nair – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview and purpose of the criminal case. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details of the alleged offences and prosecution allegations. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. arguments regarding the validity of sanction. (Para 4 , 6 , 10) |
| 4. defense argument on supervisory duties. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 5. dismissal of petition and directions for trial. (Para 12 , 13) |
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the petitioner, who is the 2nd accused in Crime No.VC-03/2022/PTA of 2022 of VACB, Pathanamthitta. The prayers in this petition are as under:
“i) To set aside Annexure I FIR, Annexure V Order and Annexure VI Internal Final Report;
ii) To declare that the petitioner is not liable to be prosecuted based on Annexure I FIR, Annexure V order and Annexure VI Internal Final Report;
(iii) To direct the respondents to refrain from proceeding against the petitioner on the basis of Annexure I FIR, Annexure V Order or Annexure VI Internal Final Report;
(iv) To pass such other order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice;
(v) To dispense with filing of the
A sanction order under the Prevention of Corruption Act must demonstrate that the sanctioning authority applied its mind to the relevant facts, ensuring its validity.
Sanction for prosecution must reflect the authority's application of mind to relevant materials; failures to specify details do not invalidate sanction unless justice is compromised.
Point of law : Sanctioning authority while granting sanction ought to have recorded their satisfaction that on what basis he arrived at the conclusion to grant sanction.
The court held that while it can review sanctions for prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, disputed facts must be resolved in criminal court, not through writ jurisdiction.
The challenge to the order of sanction on the ground of improper application of mind or non-consideration of relevant material is required to be raised during trial and established by leading evidenc....
Point of Law : Competent authority is required to look into everything placed before it and other material, if available, at the time of considering the request for grant of sanction, as it is trite ....
The court ruled that prosecution sanction must reflect independent application of mind and cannot be a mere repetition of the draft submitted by the prosecution agency.
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
