STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. CHARANJIT RAI JOSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS will dispose of two criminal revision petitions Nos. 1367 of 1980 and 1537 of 1980 filed by the State respectively against Shri Charanjit Rai Joshi of Punjab Civil Service Executive Branch and Shri Baldev Singh Ghuman, Excise and Taxation Officer. A similar question about the validity of sanction granted in relation to them for their prosecution under Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act is involved. The point for determination being the same, it is convenient to deal with them together.

(2.) THE Special Judge, Patiala, Division, Patiala, by his order dated June 14, 1980, held the sanction for prosecution of Shri C.R. Joshi granted in the name of the Governor of Punjab and authenticated by the Deputy Secretary to Government, Punjab, Department of Vigilance, dated March 12, 1979, to be invalid on this ground that the Vigilance Department though comment to hold inquiries in the corruption cases, was not the proper forum for the determination of this fact whether the prosecution of an officer was ultimately required to be launched. A similar order in respect of Shri Baldev Singh Ghuman was passed by the same special Judge with regard to a similar prosecution on August 27, 1980. The sanction order in that case had been authenticated by the Deputy Secretary to Government, Punjab, Department of Vigilance, on January 16, 1980, in the name of the Governor. It is contended by the State in both the revisions that the State Government being competent to sanction the prosecution of the gazetted officers both the sanction orders should be held to be valid. In Criminal Revision No. 1376 of 1980 it was observed in the referring order that the matter being of urgent public importance should be heard by a Division Bench. Subsequently, Criminal Revision No. 1537 was ordered to be heard with the above -said revision and for that reason both the revisions came up before us.

(3.) IT has been observed by the Special Judge in both the cases that the respondents stood only discharged and for that reason the prosecution, after obtaining proper sanction, could proceed with the cases against them.