Prior sanction for prosecution of public servants was mandatory where alleged tax-related omission arose from official duties.

Where a public servant's alleged income-tax default was directly connected with duties performed in an official capacity, prior sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was required before prosecution could be launched. In the absence of such sanction, the complaint could not be validly maintained and the Special Court's cognizance lacked legal foundation. The proceedings were therefore quashed for want of mandatory prior sanction.

---

---

Issues: Whether prosecution and cognizance for the alleged income-tax offence could stand in the absence of prior sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The petitioner was a public servant whose alleged default arose out of duties connected with deduction and reporting of income-tax in an official capacity. Since the omission complained of was directly linked with the discharge of official functions, previous sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was required before prosecution could be launched. In the absence of such sanction, the sanction granted for filing the complaint and the cognizance taken by the Special Court were without legal foundation.

Conclusion: The prosecution was not maintainable without sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and both impugned orders were liable to be quashed.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded and the challenge to the prosecution proceedings was set aside for want of mandatory prior sanction.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the alleged offence is directly connected with a public servant's official duties, prior sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is a condition precedent to valid prosecution and cognizance.

---