VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION - 197
(196)
459
Sanction of prosecution under P.C. Act — where
dismissed employee is reinstated later
The point of time when sanction is required under
the P.C. Act is the time when the court takes
cognizance of the offence and not before or after;
and it makes no difference if he is reinstated later.
K.S. Dharmadatan vs. Central Government,
1980 MLJ SC 33
The Supreme Court observed that a perusal of sec. 6 of the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (corresponding to sec. 19 of P.C.
Act. 1988) would clearly disclose that the section applies only where
at the time when the offence was committed the offender was acting
as a public servant. If the offender had ceased to be a public servant,
then sec. 6 would have no application at all. It is also manifest that
the point of time when the sanction has to be taken must be the time
when the court takes cognizance of an offence and not before or
after. If at the relevant time, the offender was not a public servant,
no sanction under sec. 6 was necessary at all.
In the present case, at the time when actual cognizance by
the court was taken, the appellant had ceased to be a public servant
having been removed from service. If some years later he had been
reinstated, that would not make the cognizance which was validly
taken by the court, a nullity or render it nugatory so as to necessitate
the taking of a fresh sanction.
(197)
(A) Inquiry Officer — framing draft charges
Inquiry Officer earlier expressing opinion on
preliminary report and preparing draft charges does
not amount to a case of Inquiry Officer himself being
both prosecutor and judge.
(B) Defence Assistant / Legal Practitioner
Refusal of Inquiry Officer to allow charged officer to