Repeat prosecution sanction under PC Act based on same material ruled invalid; IPC fraud-forgery charges revived for review

The dominant issue was the validity of a subsequent sanction for prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. SC held that where the sanctioning authority considered the same material as earlier, a later sanction resting on a mere change of opinion, without any fresh contra material, is legally unsustainable; accordingly, quashing of proceedings insofar as PC Act charges were concerned was upheld. A further issue was whether quashment of IPC charges was justified. SC found that the HC had not examined the ingredients of offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with 120B IPC, and clarified that no sanction under Section 197 CrPC was required; therefore, quashment of IPC charges was set aside and the matter remitted to the HC for fresh consideration.

---

---

Appeals challenged a High Court order quashing proceedings against accused for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with 120B IPC and Section 13(2) read with Sections 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The central issue was validity of a subsequent sanction after an earlier refusal. The Court agreed with the High Court that where the "subsequent sanction was given based on the same material," and there was "absence of any other contra material which weighed in the mind of the sanctioning authority," the later sanction "cannot be sustained in the eye of law." However, the Court held the High Court erred in quashing the IPC charges without examining them on merits, particularly since a chargesheet had been filed after investigation. It further accepted that "there is no need for grant of sanction under Section 197" for the IPC offences. Accordingly, the impugned judgment was set aside only to the extent it quashed charges under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration of those IPC charges. Appearance was dispensed with unless required by the trial court, and expeditious disposal was directed.

---