Central Bureau of Investigation vs Jagat Ram

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

3 December 2024

Case No.

Criminal Appeal No(s). 4964 of 2024

Result

Allowed

Bench

Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Manoj Misra

Citation

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 533 : 2024 INSC 952

Acts & Sections

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 CrPC

Issue for consideration

Respondent was convicted u/ss.7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by the Trial Court. High Court acquitted the respondent holding that the findings of the Trial Court were based on evidence however, as regards the issue of sanction it found that though the sanction order was proved but the official who gave the sanction was not examined. Appeal by CBI. Whether the irregularity of the sanction order, if any, has occasioned or resulted in a failure of justice.

Headnote

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – ss.19, 19(3)(a), (4) – Previous sanction necessary for prosecution – “Failure of Justice” – Respondent, if ought to be permitted to contest the issue of failure of justice due to irregularity in sanction before the High Court:

Held: Yes – Under s.19(3)(a), no finding, sentence or order by a Special Judge shall be reversed by a court of appeal on the ground of absence, error, omission or irregularity in the sanction – However, such a restraint against reversal or alteration is subject to the opinion of the court that failure of justice has in fact been occasioned thereby – Further, s.19(4) provides that while construing whether the absence, error, omission or irregularity has occasioned or resulted in failure of justice, the court will examine the fact that whether an objection could and should have been raised at an earlier stage in the proceedings – High Court held that the findings of fact of the Trial Court were based on evidence and the prosecution proved the demand and acceptance which the defence failed to rebut and thus, a presumption arose u/s.20 of the Act regarding acceptance of money – High Court took up the issue of sanction, rather than the proof of sanction on its own without the assistance of the counsel for the respondent – Judgment of High Court set aside to the extent it set aside the sanction and the consequent acquittal – Matter remanded to High Court for considering the question of legality of the order of sanction u/s.19 to consider if the irregularity, if any, has occasioned or resulted in a failure of justice – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.465. [Paras 6, 14, 15]

Words and Phrases – “Failure of Justice” – Discussed.

Judgment Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J. 1. Delay Condoned. Leave granted. 2. The Central Bureau of Investigation is in appeal against the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court allowing the criminal appeal1 filed by the accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 19882. 3. On the basis of F.I.R. on 02.12.1994, the C.B.I registered a case under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Act and a trap was arranged leading to the respondent-accused getting caught demanding and collecting a bribe as evidenced by a positive test for phenolphthalein and sodium bicarbonate. After trial, the S

View Subscription Plans →