V V GEORGE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant faced a prosecution under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act on the allegation that using his position as public servant, he forged documents and misappropriated various amounts payable as unemployment assistance to various persons and thereby derived undue pecuniary advantage and committed the offences punishable under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1981 and also under Sections 409, 465, 471 and 477(A) of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner attempted to interdict the prosecution launched against him by filing O.P. 10181/1999 contending that he being a public servant sanction under Section 197 ought to have been obtained for launching the prosecution. Therefore, the prosecution should have been dropped and he could not have been proceeded with.

(2.) THE contention urged by him before the learned Single Judge was that as a public servant he was not removable from his office except by or with the sanction of the Government. Accordingly, prosecution ought to have been launched only if Government sanctioned it.

(3.) THE learned Single Judge while considering the issue had also referred to an earlier Division Bench decision of this Court in Sarojini v. Prasannan, 1997(1) RCR(Crl.) 124 (Kerala) : 1996(2) KLT 859. In that case a Sub Inspector of Police removable from service only upon the order of a Deputy Inspector General and not by the Government faced prosecution. This Court held that in such situation they are not public servants not removable from service save by or with sanction of the State Government. The benefit of Section 197 of Cr.P.C. as well as Section 19(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act also would not be therefore claimed. Accordingly we are in full agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. Appeal fails. Dismissed. Appeal dismissed.