The court upheld the lower court’s sanction order for prosecution despite lengthy delays, focusing on the validity of the proceedings under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

J U D G M E N T

Jobin Sebastian, J.

This writ appeal is directed against the judgment in WP(Crl)

No.1722 of 2025, which was filed by the fourth accused in C.C. No.24 of 2014 and C.C. No.25 of 2014 pending before the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Kozhikode. 2. The facts necessary for the disposal of the writ appeal may be summarized as follows:

The appellant is a retired teacher. She was arrayed as the fourth accused in C.C. No.24 of 2014 and C.C. No.25 of 2014, pending before the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Kozhikode. She was charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 13 (1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 , and Sections 420 , 465, 471, 468, 477A, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code . The allegation against the accused in the said cases is that accused Nos.1 to 14, while working as Teachers at Thodannur U.P. School during the academic years 1995–96 and 1996–97, being public servants, abused their official positions by hatching a criminal conspiracy. In pursuance of the said conspiracy, they allegedly forged and falsified school records, made bogus admissions using forged documents in respect of 56 students, and marked false attendance in the attendance registers so as to inflate the student roll strength of the school. The fraudulent acts were allegedly committed with the intention of avoiding division fall and thereby retaining the posts of teachers, causing financial loss to the Government. It is further alleged that, as a consequence of the fraudulent acts, the accused teachers drew salary and allowances to which they were not entitled. According to the prosecution, an amount of Rs.3,09,130/- towards pay and allowances of four teachers who were artificially retained by reckoning bogus admissions, and Rs.510.50/- towards maintenance grant allotted to Thodannur U. P. School, aggregating to Rs.3,09,641/-, was misappropriated by the accused.

3. After submission of the final report, the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Kozhikode, after hearing both sides, framed written charges against all the accused, including the appellant, and the case was posted for trial. Thereafter, the appellant approached this Court by filing a writ petition challenging the validity of the sanction order issued under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, upholding the sanction order. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the present writ appeal has been preferred.

4. As is evident from the records, the appellant, who is alleged to be a public servant, is facing serious allegations under both the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code . There are specific allegations that the appellant, while working as a teacher in an aided school, entered into a criminal conspiracy with the other accused, forged documents, made bogus admissions, falsified attendance registers, and thereby obtained pecuniary advantage. It is alleged that these acts were committed to secure unlawful gain and to avoid division fall by artificially inflating the number of students in the school. The further allegation that substantial monetary loss was caused to the Government aggravates the seriousness of the matter.

5. It is also evident from the records that the case was registered in the year 2002, and the alleged incidents occurred in the year 1997. After investigation, the final report was filed only in the year 2014. The sanction for prosecution under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act was accorded on 25.11.2013. Thus, the case has been pending for more than two decades. Further, the appellant had approached this Court earlier through Crl.M.C.No.5604 of 2015 seeking to