Sanction under S 17A of The Prevention of Corruption Act is not required in Trap cases

0
5


 In this regard, it is apposite to refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in CBI v. Santosh Karnani2023 SCC OnLine SC 427. In this case respondent no. 1 therein, an IRS officer, was involved in case of illegal gratification, the Apex Court dealt with Section 17A of the PC Act and held as under:—

33. The contention that prior approval of investigation, as mandated under Section 17A of Prevention of Corruption Act, has not been obtained and thus, the proceedings initiated against Respondent No. 1 stand vitiated, has no legal or factual basis. Section 17A merely contemplates that police officers shall not conduct any enquiry, inquiry or investigation into any offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant where the alleged offence is relatable to any recommendation made or decision taken in discharge of official functions or duties, without the previous approval of the competent authority. The first proviso to the section states that such approval is not necessary in cases involving arrest of the person on the spot on the charges of accepting undue advantage.

34. As may be seen, the first proviso to Section 17A refers to cases wherein a public servant is charged with acceptance of an undue advantage or attempt thereof. A prior approval or sanction to investigate such an officer in a trap case is likely to defeat the very purpose of trap and the investigation, which is not the underlying intention of the legislature. The investigation against Respondent No. 1, being an accused of demanding a bribe, did not require any previous approval of the Central Government. That apart, the accusation against Respondent No. 1 does not revolve around any recommendations made or decisions taken by him in his quasi-judicial or administrative capacity.{Para 39}

 In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

(Before Shalinder Kaur, J.)

Arun Kumar Jindal Vs Central Bereau of Investigation 

Bail Appln. 1705/2025 and CRL.M.A. 13567/2025

Decided on May 9, 2025

Citation: 2025 SCC OnLine Del 3026.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here