STATE OF PUNJAB versus LABH SINGH
Sanction under Prevention of Corruption Act is not required if the public servant has retired prior to cognizance by the court, but protection under Section 197 Cr.P.C. persists after retirement for offences under IPC.
- Parties
- Appellant: State of Punjab; Respondent: Labh Singh
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 17 December 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Order Dated 17.01.2006 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Criminal Revision No. 1743 of 2005
- Outcome
- Appeal partly allowed
- Legal Topics
- Sanction for Prosecution, Retired Public Servants, Protection Under Section 197 Cr.p.c., Cognizance Without Sanction, Prevention of Corruption Act
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
State of Punjab
Appellant
Labh Singh
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Order Dated 17.01.2006 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Criminal Revision No. 1743 of 2005
Legal Issues
- 1 Is sanction under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 required to prosecute a public servant who retired before court cognizance?
- 2 Does protection under Section 197 Cr.P.C. apply to retired public servants for offences under IPC?
Ratio Decidendi
Sanction under Prevention of Corruption Act is not required if the public servant has retired prior to cognizance by the court, but protection under Section 197 Cr.P.C. persists after retirement for offences under IPC.
Court Disposition
Appeal partly allowed
Orders
- High Court order set aside regarding charge under Prevention of Corruption Act; order upheld regarding charges under IPC. No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment