https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305107 Previous sanction was required before a court could take cognizance of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Customs Act. The sanction on record was described as competent for cognizance, but its operative part authorised prosecution only. Because a sanction for prosecution is distinct from a sanction for taking cognizance, it could not satisfy the statutory requirement. The charges under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 136(1) of the Customs Act were therefore set aside, while the charge under Section 477A of the Indian Penal Code remained undisturbed. en-us Fri, 29 Jul 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Nov 2022 10:42:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305107 Previous sanction was required before a court could take cognizance of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Customs Act. The sanction on record was described as competent for cognizance, but its operative part authorised prosecution only. Because a sanction for prosecution is distinct from a sanction for taking cognizance, it could not satisfy the statutory requirement. The charges under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 136(1) of the Customs Act were therefore set aside, while the charge under Section 477A of the Indian Penal Code remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 29 Jul 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305107