New Delhi, Jan 13: The Supreme Court on Tuesday delivered a split verdict on the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which mandates prior sanction before initiating any probe against a government servant in corruption cases.
Justice B.V. Nagarathna held that Section 17A is unconstitutional and liable to be struck down, observing that the requirement of prior approval runs contrary to the objectives of the Prevention of Corruption Act, forecloses inquiry and ends up shielding corrupt officials. In contrast, Justice K.V. Viswanathan upheld the provision as constitutional, stressing the need to protect honest officers from frivolous or motivated investigations.
Justice Viswanathan cautioned that striking down Section 17A would be akin to “throwing the baby out with the bath water,” adding that the cure could be worse than the disease.
In view of the divergent opinions, the matter will now be placed before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant for the constitution of a larger bench to hear the case afresh and deliver a final verdict.
Section 17A, introduced through an amendment in July 2018, bars any enquiry, inquiry or investigation into decisions or recommendations made by a public servant in the discharge of official duties without prior approval from the competent authority.
The judgment came on a public interest litigation filed by NGO Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), which had challenged the constitutional validity of the amended provision, arguing that it weakens anti-corruption enforcement. (Agencies)
