C.S. KRISHNAMURTHY versus STATE OF KARNATAKA

C.S. KRISHNAMURTHY versus STATE OF KARNATAKA

Sanction order for prosecution under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, read with evidence of sanctioning authority, is valid and properly accorded upon due application of mind; facts mentioned in sanction order are eloquent for constituting prima facie offence; no interference with High Court's affirmation of validity of sanction is warranted.

Parties
Appellant: C.S. Krishnamurthy; Respondent: State of Karnataka
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
29 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Disposition by Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sanction for Prosecution, Prevention of Corruption Act, Prosecution of Public Servant, Validity of Sanction
Criminal Law Sanction for Prosecution Prevention of Corruption Act Prosecution of Public Servant Validity of Sanction

Case Brief

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C.S. Krishnamurthy

Appellant

State of Karnataka

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Disposition by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sanction order for prosecution under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 is valid?
  2. 2 Whether the accused acquired assets disproportionate to known sources of income?
  3. 3 Whether prosecution proved offence under Section 5(1)(e), punishable under Section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947?

Ratio Decidendi

Sanction order for prosecution under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, read with evidence of sanctioning authority, is valid and properly accorded upon due application of mind; facts mentioned in sanction order are eloquent for constituting prima facie offence; no interference with High Court's affirmation of validity of sanction is warranted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No interference with High Court's order; Special Judge to decide matter afresh excepting point of sanction; Adverse observations against trial Judge deleted.