‘Provision to protect corrupt’ SC's Justice Nagarathna says on section 17A of PC Act
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Tuesday delivered a split verdict on the constitutional validity of a 2018 provision of the anti-graft law which mandates prior sanction for initiating a probe against a government servant in a corruption case.
While Justice BV Nagarathna said Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act is unconstitutional and needs to be struck down, Justice KV Viswanathan held the provision as constitutional while stressing on the need to protect honest officers.
Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, introduced in July 2018, bars any “enquiry or inquiry or investigation” against a public servant for recommendations made in discharge of official duties without prior approval from the competent authority.
The top court's judgement came on a PIL filed by NGO 'Centre for Public Interest Litigation' (CPIL) against the validity of amended section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Requirement of prior sanction is contrary to the Prevention of Corruption Act, forecloses inquiry and protects corrupt, Justice Nagarathna said.
ALSO READ: Snag hits Akasa Air Pune-Bengaluru flight ahead of departure; airline deplanes passengers
"Section 17A is unconstitutional and it ought to be struck down. No prior approval is required to be taken... The requirement of prior sanction is contrary to the object of the Act, and it forecloses inquiry and protects the corrupt rather than seeking to protect the honest and those with integrity who really do not require any protection," Justice Nagarathna said.
Justice Viswanathan said striking down section 17A will be akin to throwing the baby out with the bath water and the “cure will be worse than the disease”.
"Section 17A is constitutionally valid subject to the condition that the sanction must be decided by the Lok Pal or the Lokayukta of the State...
"The safeguard of this provision will strengthen the hands of honest officers but also ensure that the corrupt are brought to book. It will guarantee that the administrative machinery attracts the best talent for the service of the nation,"Justice Viswanathan said.
The case will now be placed before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant for forming a larger bench to hear the matter for a final decision.
"Having regard to the divergent opinions expressed by us, we direct the Registry to place this matter before the Chief Justice of India for constituting an appropriate bench to consider the issues which arise in this matter afresh," the bench said.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the NGO, had argued that the provisions crippled the anti-corruption law as sanctions were not usually forthcoming from the government, which was the ‘competent authority’.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had appeared for the Union government.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC asks states to treat rising child trafficking cases as grave; seeks coordinated action
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court has voiced grave concern over rising cases of child trafficking, saying gangs are operating across the country and if States and Union territories do not take immediate action, thing will go beyond control.
The court said only the state government and its home department can act vigilantly in this regard.
“As a court we can monitor, but ultimately the action has to be on the part of the state government, the police, and other agencies. Therefore, this is our humble request”, a bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan said during the hearing of a plea on Wednesday.
The bench was irked over the "lackadaisical" approach of several states and UTs in implementing a 2025 judgment aimed at dismantling organised trafficking networks.
Justice Viswanathan said the retrieval of children in some cases proves the problem can be tackled, but it requires a level of political and administrative will which is lacking at present.
The verdict, delivered on April 15, 2025, had mandated several institutional reforms, including completion of trials in trafficking cases within six months on a day-to-day basis.
It had also directed strengthening of Anti-Human Trafficking Units (AHTUs) and improving investigation standards.
Besides asking for setting up of state-level committees to monitor vulnerable trafficking hotspots, it had asked the authorities to treat missing children cases as trafficking unless proven otherwise.
Earlier, the bench had termed the compliance reports filed by a few states as "nothing but an eye wash."
On Wednesday, the bench noted that Madhya Pradesh, Goa, Haryana, Lakshadweep, Mizoram, Odisha, and Punjab had still failed to file reports in the prescribed format.
When the home secretary of Madhya Pradesh offered an apology for the lapse, the bench granted a "final opportunity" but warned that continued failure would lead to states being officially branded as "defaulting".
The bench noted that at least 15 states are yet to constitute review committees mandated to identify and monitor trafficking-prone areas.
The matter will now be heard on April 29.
