cpc

circumstances weakening the binding force of judicial preced

Advocate


 Judgment delivered by Apex court in Special leave petition (criminal ) 6652-53/2013 dated 1st October 2013 by Bench comprising Justice K S Radhakrishan and  Justice A K Sikri has raised debate on the issue. In this case supreme court has held  that in cases under P C Act 1988 special courts having jurisdiction can not direct registration of F I R under section 156(3) of cr pc  against public servant without sanction of prosecution against him .

                           Established preposition of law  as held in Tula ram v/s Kishor singh 1977 S C and Srinavas Gundluri v/s SEPCO 2010 SC  cases  that sanction is only required at the time of cognizance of case and order u/s 156(3) cr p c is not amounting to taking cognizance of case. In subramanium Swamy v/s Manmohan singh it  has held that in complaint case against public servant in prevention of corruption case  prior sanction is essential because examination of complainant amounts to taking cognizance  but now in above case has held that sanction is essential against public servant in prevention of corruption case   if court order investigation under section 156(3) of cr pc  even that the order under section 156(3) of cr pc   does not amount to taking cognizance as per the present settled legal preposition of law is definitely weakening  the concept of judicial precedent.

 

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

IPC Grand Course     |    x