Whether sanction is necessary for retired employee

by | 14 Feb, 2021 | Latest Advice Online

Home | Advice | Latest Advice Online | Whether sanction is necessary for retired employee

Whether prosecution is necessary for retired employee? A loan was sanctioned in August 2012. CBI admitted the case, employee retired in 31st march 2013. The bank filed complaint with CBI without charging sanctioning authority in 1.6 2017. CBI filed case on 30.07.2019 without taking approval from sanctioning authority. Case was admitted in CBI court. Bank subsequently refused permission for prosecution and sanction was denied. Recently case is standing at the point of charge.

As the bank has filed complaint after four years with CBI and also sanction have denied by the bank. Whether discharge is possible under above circumstance.

Question from: Delhi

The CBI initiated proceeding against you after the retirement therefore, you are not entitle to take protection granted to public servant under section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. If the court would have taken congnisance on or before the retirement then sanction was mandatory [K. Veeraswami v. Union of India, (1991) 3 SCC 655].

Whether sanction is necessary for retired employee?

The public servants having retired from service there was no occasion to consider grant of sanction under Section 19 of the PC Act. The law on the point is quite clear that sanction to prosecute the public servant for the offences under the PC Act is not required if the public servant had already retired on the date of cognizance by the court. [State of Punjab v. Labh Singh, (2014) 16 SCC 807]

The above provision is applicable if charges sheet is produced for the offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act. If the charge sheet did not file under the PC Act then a retired public service is entitled to take the protection available to him under section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (crpc).

If charge sheet is relating to the offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), then sanction is mandatory [State of H.P. v. Nishant Sareen, (2010) 14 SCC 527]. According to section 197 crpc, court cannot frame charge without sanction of the concerned authority. As you said that sanction has been denied, so court cannot frame charge against you if the offence committed under the IPC only. In this condition discharge is possible.

Other advice you might like

Revision against order of investigation passed u/s 156(3) crpc

Accused cannot file revision against order of investigation passed by the Magistrate under section 156(3) of the code of criminal procedure. Section 156(3) crpc empowers the Magistrate to direct the police to register an FIR and investigate the case. When police do...

Conviction based on handwriting expert is not valid

Court convicted my brother for the offence of forgery. Conviction is solely based on handwriting expert. His evidence is the main reason of conviction. There is no other evidence which proves that he has committed the crime of forgery. His wife filed FIR against him...

Kanoonirai established in 2014, provides legal assistence through online media, telephonic consultation and video conferencing.