Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2020) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15187 = 2020 L.A.R. (e-Suppl.) 468
Decided on: 29.07.2020
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. Harin P. Raval, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sanjay Kr. Shandilya, Adv., Ms. Apoorva Agrawal, Adv. and Mr. Mushtaq Ahmad, AOR
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860) -- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988), 19 – Offence under IPC and PC Act -- Sanction under PC Act not forthcoming – Effect of -- Charge against the petitioner for offence punishable under the IPC can continue irrespective of the fact that sanction in respect of offence punishable under PC Act is not forthcoming.
(Para 2, 3)
ORDER
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. We decline to deviate from the view taken by the High Court that the charge against the petitioner for offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code can continue irrespective of the fact that sanction in respect of offence punishable under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is not forthcoming. To that extent, we find no infirmity in the conclusion reached by the High Court.
3. Our understanding of the impugned judgment is that the High Court has made it clear that if sanction to prosecute the petitioner for offence punishable under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is not or has not been granted, the question of proceeding against the petitioner for that charge does not arise. This aspect be borne in mind by the Trial Court while proceeding with the trial against the petitioner.
4. In light of above, no further indulgence is warranted.
5. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed accordingly.
6. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Petition dismissed.
********