PROSECUTION SANCTIONS UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 AND A RECENT DECISION OF THE TWO JUDGES, 17A TO HAVE THE PREVIOUS SANCTION OF THE APPROPRIATE ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY/GOVERNMENT

As for as prosecution of sanction is required under section 19 of the prevention of corruption Act, 1988 , Provisions of the Act making it necessary for the prosecuting authority to have the previous sanction of the appropriate administrative authority for launching prosecution against a public servant. For ready reference, No court shall take cognisance of an offence punishable under section, 7,10,11,13 and 15 alleged to have been committed by a public servant, except with the previous sanction (2) Where for any reason whatsoever any doubt arises whether the previous sanction as required under sub - section (1) should be given by the authority competent to remove him from his office, such sanction shall be given by the Government or authority which would have been competent to remove the public servant from his office at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed. As for as (PCA-1988) is concerned the Central Government had constituted a committee on prevention of corruption under the chairmanship of K Santhanam in 1962 and the said committee submitted its report in, 1964 . It resulted in the strengthening of laws dealing with bribery and the criminal mis conduct and finally a comprehensive act was enacted to consolidate the law relating to prevention of corruption in the form of PCA, 1988 and the said Act provides for punishment with respect to offences committed by the public servants while performing their public duties and which includes any government or local authority employee, any judge, any person who holds an office by virtue of which he is required to perform a public duty etc and a duty in the discharge of which the government, the public or the community at large has an interest. The type of offences punishable under PCA, 1988 , includes bribery, undue advantage without consideration, misconduct etc It is particularly mentioned here that the recent judgement given by the honourable Supreme Court of India has announced two way verdict on the captioned subject of said section 17A and it is necessary to bring it to an exercise for its discretion properly, after asking for more particulars, permissible to prove by evidence that the competent authority has applied it's mind related to the facts of the case, required to avoid delays and expense so for the sake of convenience and  uniformity of practice, observed by the checks and balances and taking necessary effective steps in rooting out corruption may have an appropriate vision of the law code manual prefixed by the vigilance department in this behalf:-- Er Fateh Chand Guleria, Director RTI Welfare Association registered number HPCD, 3552 , Bilaspur Himachal pradesh phone number 9459334377