Competent sanction for prosecution is mandatory; absence of approval by the proper authority creates a jurisdictional defect.

Sanction for prosecution must be accorded by the authority competent under the applicable allocation of business. The prosecution relied on sanction granted by the Ministry of Industrial Development and Company Affairs under Section 6(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, but the challenge was that only the Home Department of the Government of India could validly grant sanction. As the Home Ministry had not sanctioned the prosecution, the absence of competent sanction constituted a jurisdictional defect and the prosecution could not stand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the sanction for prosecution was accorded by the competent authority.

Analysis: The sanction relied on by the prosecution was granted by the Ministry of Industrial Development and Company Affairs under Section 6(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The challenge was that, on the applicable allocation of business, only the Home Department of the Government of India could validly sanction the prosecution. Once it was stated before the Court that the Home Ministry had not sanctioned the prosecution, the absence of competent sanction became a jurisdictional defect.

Conclusion: The sanction was not granted by the competent authority and the prosecution could not stand.

---