There is one SC judgement where it is set aside in case of Prevention of Corruption Act Section 12. I will search it and send you.
Sharad Phadke
From: Surendera M. Bhanot <bhanot1952@gmail.com>
To: Sant Mathur <santmathur@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, 2 June 2012 6:13 PM
Subject: [rti_india] Re: P&H High court : No sanction needed to remove corrupt babus:
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Sant Mathur <santmathur@gmail.com> wrote:
s p mathurHow have the country's legal luminaries reacted to the P&H HC judgement? How about its applicability countrywide?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
My Comments:
The High Court has only interpreted the law as it stands.
--
GREETINGS AND WARM REGARDS
Surendera M. Bhanot
- Coordinator, RTIFED, Punjab Chandigarh
The interpretation is applicable pan India till any other High Court give a different interpretation or it is rebutted by the Supreme Court. The interpretation is clear enough.
Dr. Subramanium Swamy is using Section 5(3) of the Prevention of the Corruption Act 1988 whereby he is also the Public Prosecutor.
One must have a inconclusive proof of the corruption being there. One can file a direct complaint under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, apply to the proceedings before a special Judge; and for the purposes of the said provisions, the Court of the special Judge shall be deemed to be a Court of Session and the person conducting a prosecution before a special Judge shall be deemed to be a public prosecutor.
The relevant provisions of the CPA is reproduced below:
-------------------------------------------------------
THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988
Section 5. Procedure and powers of special Judge
(1) A special Judge may take cognizance of offences without the accused being committed to him for trial and, in trying the accused persons, shall follow the procedure prescribed by the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. for the trial of warrant cases by Magistrates.
(2) A special Judge may, with a view to obtaining the evidence of any person supposed to have been directly or indirectly concerned in or privy to, an offence, tender a pardon to such person on condition of his making a full and true disclosure of the whole circumstances within his knowledge. relating to the offence and to every other person concerned, whether as principal or abettor, in the commission thereof and any pardon so tendered shall, for the purposes of sub-sections (1) to (5) of section 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, be deemed to have been tendered under section 307 of that Code.
(3) Save as provided in sub-sections (1) or sub-section (2), the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, shall, so far as they are not inconsistent with this Act, apply to the proceedings before a special Judge; and for the purposes of the said provisions, the Court of the special Judge shall be deemed to be a Court of Session and the person conducting a prosecution before a special Judge shall be deemed to be a public prosecutor.
(4) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the provisions contained in subsection (3), the provisions of sections 326 and 475 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, shall, so for as may be, apply to the proceedings before a special Judge and for the purposes of the said provisions, a special Judge shall be deemed to be a Magistrate.
(5) A special Judge may pass upon any person convicted by him any sentence authorised by law for the punishment of the offence of which such person is convicted.
(6) A special Judge, while trying an offence punishable under this Act, shall exercise all the powers and functions exercisable by a District Judge under the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Sant Mathur <santmathur@gmail.com> wrote:
How have the country's legal luminaries reacted to the P&H HC judgement? How about its applicability countrywide?spmathur
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Surendera M. Bhanot <bhanot1952@gmail.com> wrote:
High court:No sanction needed to remove corrupt babusSaurabh Malik/TNSChandigarh, 28 May 2012In a first, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has reinterpreted provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act to hold that public servants, who can be removed by the subordinate authorities other than the government, are not entitled to protection of sanction......To Read More open attachment.--
GREETINGS AND WARM REGARDS
Surendera M. Bhanot
- Coordinator, RTIFED, Punjab Chandigarh- President, RTI Help & Assistance Forum Chandigarh- Life Member, Chandigarh Consumers Association
- Youth for Human Rights International - YHRI - South Asia
- Jt. Secretary, Amateur Judo Association of Chandigarh
- Member, SPACE - Society for Promotion and Conservation of Environment, Chandigarh
No. 3758, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh-160022
Mob: 919-888-810-811
PHONE: 91-172-5000970
FAX: 91-172-5000970
Mail Me
GREETINGS AND WARM REGARDS
Surendera M. Bhanot
- Coordinator, RTIFED, Punjab Chandigarh
- President, RTI Help & Assistance Forum Chandigarh
- Life Member, Chandigarh Consumers Association
- Youth for Human Rights International - YHRI - South Asia
- Jt. Secretary, Amateur Judo Association of Chandigarh
- Member, SPACE - Society for Promotion and Conservation of Environment, Chandigarh
No. 3758, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh-160022
Mob: 919-888-810-811
PHONE: 91-172-5000970
FAX: 91-172-5000970
Mail Me
- Youth for Human Rights International - YHRI - South Asia
- Jt. Secretary, Amateur Judo Association of Chandigarh
- Member, SPACE - Society for Promotion and Conservation of Environment, Chandigarh
No. 3758, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh-160022
Mob: 919-888-810-811
PHONE: 91-172-5000970
FAX: 91-172-5000970
Mail Me
__._,_.___
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment