RAVINDER JUGRAN Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We had, in our order dated 16.12.2019, noted that Annexure 4 of the Progress Report-Affidavit filed by the SIT contained the names of five individuals (Officers of the District Social Welfare Department); while sanction to prosecute the first among them was granted by the State Government, and a charge-sheet had also been filed against him, sanction for prosecution, with respect to those named at Serial Nos. 2 to 5, was still pending consideration before the Principal Secretary (Social Welfare), Government of Uttarakhand; and the Head of the SIT had submitted that the Investigating Officer had made an application, to the Principal Secretary (Social Welfare), on 09.12.2019, seeking sanction to prosecute these officials also.

(2.) After taking note of the fact that an application was made only a week earlier, we had called upon the Principal Secretary (Social Welfare), Government of Uttarakhand to submit a report to this Court by the next date of hearing (as to the action taken by him on the request made to accord sanction). The Principal Secretary (Social Welfare) was directed to file his report before this Court by 06.01.2020. In his affidavit dated 03.01.2020, the Principal Secretary (Social Welfare Department) states that a representation was received from Mr. Geetaram Nautiyal on 30.12.2019 not to grant sanction for prosecution against him; the representation dated 30.12.2019, submitted by Mr. Geetaram Nautiyal, was being examined at the Government level; the process required sometime for consideration for the representation dated 30.12.2019; and some time be granted to him regarding the decision to be taken by the Government on grant of sanction for prosecution.

(3.) Chapter 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 relates to sanction for prosecution and other miscellaneous provisions. Section 19, thereunder, stipulates that previous sanction is necessary for prosecution. Under sub-section (1)(b) thereof, no court shall take cognizance of an offence, punishable under Sections 7, 11, 13, and 15, alleged to have been committed by a public servant, except with the previous sanction, in the case of a person who is employed, or as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed in connection with the affairs of a State and is not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the State Government, of that Government i.e. the State Government.