Summary
A public servant could not be summoned under Section 319 CrPC for corruption offences without prior sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The special statute’s mandatory bar overrides the general power to add an accused during trial. The Court upheld the High Court’s order setting aside the doctor’s summons and dismissed the State’s appeal.
Issues
- Whether Section 319 permits adding a public servant to a corruption trial without prior prosecution sanction.
- Whether sanction must precede the prosecution’s Section 319 application.
Provisions considered
- Section 19(1), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988Prior sanction from the competent authority is mandatory for cognizance of the covered offences against the particular public servant; the requirement is not displaced by a Section 319 application. (¶¶ 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
- Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973The general power to summon an additional accused cannot override the special sanction requirement. The prosecution should first obtain sanction, and the trial court should insist upon it. (¶¶ 8, 9, 10, 11)
Held
- The respondent’s status as a public servant was undisputed. Section 19 creates a mandatory bar to cognizance of its covered corruption offences without the competent authority’s prior sanction, directed to prosecution of the particular accused. (¶¶ 7, 8, 10)
- That special statutory requirement overrides the general provisions for cognizance and addition of accused under the CrPC. A Special Judge cannot use Section 319 to proceed against a public servant for the covered offences when the necessary sanction has not been obtained. (¶¶ 8, 9, 10, 11)
- The prosecution should have obtained sanction before formally moving its Section 319 application, and the trial court should have required it before summoning the doctor. In its absence the procedure was flawed; the High Court correctly set the summons aside. (¶¶ 4, 5, 8, 11)
Result
State’s appeal dismissed; High Court order setting aside the respondent’s Section 319 summons for want of prior sanction affirmed.