Prior sanction is mandatory before pre-cognizance investigation can be ordered on a corruption complaint against a public servant.

Previous sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act is required before a Special Judge can invoke Section 156(3) CrPC on a private complaint against a public servant for PCA offences. A reference for investigation under Section 156(3) is made at the pre-cognizance stage, and the sanction bar operates as a jurisdictional threshold rather than a mere procedural defect. The Special Judge, acting with magistrate powers, must apply judicial mind before directing investigation, and Section 19(3) does not cure absence of valid prior sanction at this stage. The reference to investigation without such sanction was invalid.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in a private complaint against a public servant alleging offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the Special Judge can refer the matter for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 without a valid previous sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and whether such a reference is made at the pre-cognizance stage.

Analysis: A reference under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is made before cognizance is taken, and therefore operates at the pre-cognizance stage. A Special Judge, who is empowered as a Magistrate, must apply judicial mind before directing investigation, and the order must reflect the basis for such direction. The protection afforded by Section 19(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is not merely procedural; it bars taking notice of a complaint against a public servant for the specified offences unless previous sanction is obtained. Section 19(3) does not dilute the mandatory nature of the sanction requirement, because it deals with the effect of defects in sanction after findings, sentence, or orders have been passed, not with the threshold jurisdiction to order investigation.

Conclusion: Previous sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is mandatory even before a Special Judge can invoke Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against a public servant, and the impugned reference to investigation without such sanction was invalid.

Ratio Decidendi: A complaint against a public servant for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 cannot be referred for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 unless the court has the requisite previous sanction under Section 19, because the sanction requirement is jurisdictional at the pre-cognizance stage.

---