https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307610 State consent under the DSPE Act was held unnecessary where the principal offence was committed outside the State's territory, even if one accused was a State public servant. The Court treated the alleged fraud and siphoning of funds as offences committed in Delhi against a Government of India undertaking, so the consent requirement in Section 6 did not restrict registration or investigation merely because a Bihar officer was involved. It also held that the proviso in the general consent notification could not create a separate consent requirement for Bihar public servants in the same investigation. The challenge to jurisdiction therefore failed, and investigation without prior State consent was upheld. en-us Fri, 24 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Apr 2023 08:44:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307610 State consent under the DSPE Act was held unnecessary where the principal offence was committed outside the State's territory, even if one accused was a State public servant. The Court treated the alleged fraud and siphoning of funds as offences committed in Delhi against a Government of India undertaking, so the consent requirement in Section 6 did not restrict registration or investigation merely because a Bihar officer was involved. It also held that the proviso in the general consent notification could not create a separate consent requirement for Bihar public servants in the same investigation. The challenge to jurisdiction therefore failed, and investigation without prior State consent was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 24 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307610