Upgrad LLM

inconsistent verdict

Advocate

 


 

It is submitted, with due respect to their lordships, that the Apex Court’s decision in the CVC case is baffling. The inconsistency is all too apparent in that an individual has been condemned for his integrity to hold the high post with the caveat that this is not a finding on the individual’s personal integrity. The question involved is, we are informed, a question of legality of the criminal case allegedly pending against the individual. The text of the Judgment leaves no doubt that the Central Government has so far not accorded the requisite permission under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code which mandates that no Court can take cognisance of such an alleged against public servant unless the sanction is given.   However, the verdict has not at all examined the relevant question of law whether, in the absence of mandatory sanction, there is a pending criminal case in the eyes of the law. So also, the Court has not taken note of the law laid by its Full Bench in Jankiraman’s (Union of India v. K.V.Janakiraman 1991 AIR 2010)case, that a a pending criminal case is not an impediment in being considered for appointment to a higher post so long as sanction for prosecution has not been issued.

P.Venu

 
Reply   
 
Adv P & H High Court Chandigarh

In the case of Thomas, sanction had already been provided and moreover, a person appointed on such august post is otherwise required to be above any reasonable suspicion so verdict of Apex Court is strictly as per law and public interest.
 
Reply   
 


LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

CrPC MASTERCLASS!     |    x