https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464177 Sanction to prosecute under the Prevention of Corruption Act is governed by its own statutory framework and is not displaced by Section 197 CrPC, which applies to acts connected with official duty; the Court rejected the plea that an additional sanction requirement could be implied. The sanction was treated as competent and valid. On framing of charge, detailed reasons are not mandatory because the court only forms a prima facie opinion, but reasons must be recorded when a jurisdictional objection is raised and decided, as that goes to adjudicatory competence. The sanction challenge failed and the legal position on reasons at the charge stage was clarified. en-us Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Oct 2025 17:44:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464177 Sanction to prosecute under the Prevention of Corruption Act is governed by its own statutory framework and is not displaced by Section 197 CrPC, which applies to acts connected with official duty; the Court rejected the plea that an additional sanction requirement could be implied. The sanction was treated as competent and valid. On framing of charge, detailed reasons are not mandatory because the court only forms a prima facie opinion, but reasons must be recorded when a jurisdictional objection is raised and decided, as that goes to adjudicatory competence. The sanction challenge failed and the legal position on reasons at the charge stage was clarified. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464177