Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 369 (UTT)

SADHAN KUMAR MAJUMDAR v. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

2011-06-20

PRAFULLA C.PANT

body2011
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. 2. By means of this petition, moved undver section 482 of Code of Criminal Procesure, 1973, the petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings of Special Session Trial 7 of 2006, State vs. S.K. Majumdar, pending in the court of Special Judge, Anti Corruption, Dehradun/Sessions Judge Dehradun, relating to offences punishable under sectin 7/13, Prevention of Corruption “Act, 1988, and under sections 1478, 332, 353, 186 and 504 I.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no sanction was obtained by the prosecution agency before filing the cvharge sheet against the petitioner who was Assistant Drug Controller of the State of Uttarakhand. 4. Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, ;provides that no court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under section 7, 10, 11, 13 and 15 of the Act committed by a public servant except with the previous sanction obtained from the concerned State Government or Union of India as the case may be. Perusal of the counter affidavit discloses that no sanction was given against the petitioner under section 19(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary counter affidavit on behalf of the petitioner shows that vide lated dated 20th of March 2009, the principal secretary to the Government of Uttarakhand informed that the Dirfector Vigilance that the Government has decided not to prosecute the petitioner S.K. Majumdar the then Assistant Drug Controller. Issuance of said after gets confirmed from Annexure-3 filed with reply of respondent no. 1 in its supplementary affidavit dated 17th of March, 2011. From the all correspondance on record, it is evidfently clear that nho sanction for prosecution under any of the section was obtained by the prosecution agency. 5. In the above circumstances, for the want of mandatory sanction required under law the impugned prosecutiokn of the petitioner is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the petitiokn under section 482 of Cr.P.C., is alloowed and the proceedings of Special Session Trial 7 of 2006, State vs. S.K. Majumdar, pending in the court of Special Judge, Anti Corruption, Dehradun/Sessions Judge Dehradun, relating to offences punishable under section 7/13, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and under section 147, 332, 353, 186 and 504 I.P.C., are hereby quashed.