CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION versus RAMESH CHANDER DIWAN

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION versus RAMESH CHANDER DIWAN

Because the respondent was initially appointed by the Government of Punjab, was sent on deputation with extensions by the Governor of Punjab, there is no material showing absorption in Municipal Corporation or transfer of disciplinary control, and he remained removable only by the appropriate authority in the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Central Bureau of Investigation; Respondent: Ramesh Chander Diwan
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Special Leave Appeals Against the Judgment and Order Dated 29.01.2024 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; impugned High Court order upheld
Legal Topics
Section 197 Cr.p.c., Sanction for Prosecution, Deputation, Public Servant (section 21 Ipc), Article 311 Constitution of India, Disciplinary Control Over Deputationist, Discharge
Criminal Procedure Criminal Law Service Law Constitutional Law Section 197 Cr.p.c. Sanction for Prosecution Deputation Public Servant (section 21 Ipc) +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Central Bureau of Investigation

Appellant

Ramesh Chander Diwan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Special Leave Appeals Against the Judgment and Order Dated 29.01.2024 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sanction under Section 197, Cr.P.C. was required for prosecution of the respondent who was on deputation to Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh
  2. 2 Whether the respondent ceased to be a public servant upon deputation/relief to join Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and thus fell outside protection of Section 197, Cr.P.C.
  3. 3 Whether amended Section 19(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 has retrospective application to retired public servants

Ratio Decidendi

Because the respondent was initially appointed by the Government of Punjab, was sent on deputation with extensions by the Governor of Punjab, there is no material showing absorption in Municipal Corporation or transfer of disciplinary control, and he remained removable only by the appropriate authority in the Government of Punjab, he continued to be a public servant for purposes of Section 197(1), Cr.P.C.; therefore sanction having not been obtained, the High Court was correct in discharging him of the offences under Sections 120B and 420 IPC (the appeals dismissed).

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; impugned High Court order upheld

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Impugned order of the High Court dated 29.01.2024 affirmed insofar as discharge under Sections 120B and 420 IPC was granted for want of sanction under Section 197, Cr.P.C.