TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1737
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rate of Enforcement, Union of India is that the prosecution complaint being Complaint Case No. 03 of 2018 dated 12.12.2018 numbered as 03 before the Special Court was filed against one Ram Vinod Prasad Sinha. It is further case of the Respondent that 13 FIRs were registered by the Jharkhand Police at Khunti, number of each case has been mentioned at para-1.2 of the prosecution complaint. During the investigation of all the FIRs, it transpired that defalcation of huge amount of Government money running into crores was found to be true against the named accused persons, as per the audit report. It has also come to light that the petitioner Pooja Singhal who was officiating as the Deputy Commissioner, Khunti defalcated Government money in many projects. The Audit Committee suggested that defalcation to the tune of Rs. 18.06 crore was committed during the period from 16.02.2009 to 19.07.2010, when she was the Principal Authority for sanctioning the funds for different development projects in connivance with the engineers who are the named accused persons. During the course of investigation, various premises including that of the petitioner and her associates were raided and searched an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s there is any provision in PMLA which is inconsistent with Section 197(1). No such provision has been pointed out to us. Therefore, we hold that the provisions of Section 197(1) CrPC are applicable to a complaint under Section 44(1)(b) PMLA. 24. Section 71 gives an overriding effect to the provisions of PMLA notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force. Section 65 is a prior section which specifically makes the provisions of CrPC applicable to PMLA, subject to the condition that only those provisions of CrPC will apply which are not inconsistent with the provisions of PMLA. Therefore, when a particular provision of CrPC applies to proceedings under PMLA by virtue of Section 65 PMLA, Section 71(1) cannot override the provision of CrPC which applies to PMLA. 25. Once we hold that in view of Section 65 PMLA, Section 197(1) will apply to the provisions of PMLA, Section 71 cannot be invoked to say that the provision of Section 197(1) CrPC will not apply to PMLA. A provision of CrPC, made applicable to PMLA by Section 65, will not be overridden by Section 71. Those provisions of CrPC which apply to PMLA by virtu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icial duty, the excess will not be a sufficient ground to deprive the public servant of the protection. Reliance has been placed upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of State of Orissa versus Ganesh Chandra Jew [(2004) 8 SCC 40], wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court at para-7, 8, 9 and 10 has held as under: "7. The protection given under Section 197 is to protect responsible public servants against the institution of possibly vexatious criminal proceedings for offences alleged to have been committed by them while they are acting or purporting to act as public servants. The policy of the legislature is to afford adequate protection to public servants to ensure that they are not prosecuted for anything done by them in the discharge of their official duties without reasonable cause, and if sanction is granted, to confer on the Government, if they choose to exercise it, complete control of the prosecution. This protection has certain limits and is available only when the alleged act done by the public servant is reasonably connected with the discharge of his official duty and is not merely a cloak for doing the objectionable act. If in doing his offic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctually engaged in the performance of his official duties; but if the act complained of is directly concerned with his official duties so that, if questioned, it could be claimed to have been done by virtue of the office, then sanction would be necessary. It is the quality of the act that is important and if it falls within the scope and range of his official duties the protection contemplated by Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code will be attracted. An offence may be entirely unconnected with the official duty as such or it may be committed within the scope of the official duty. Where it is unconnected with the official duty there can be no protection. It is only when it is either within the scope of the official duty or in excess of it that the protection is claimable." 9. Prior to examining if the courts below committed any error of law in discharging the accused, it may not be out of place to examine the nature of power exercised by the court under Section 197 of the Code and the extent of protection it affords to public servants, who apart from various hazards in discharge of their duties, in absence of a provision like the one may be exposed to vexatious prose....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....conditions are satisfied. The mandatory character of the protection afforded to a public servant is brought out by the expression "no court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction". Use of the words "no" and "shall" makes it abundantly clear that the bar on the exercise of power by the court to take cognizance of any offence is absolute and complete. The very cognizance is barred.That is, the complaint cannot be taken notice of. According to Black's Law Dictionary the word "cognizance" means "jurisdiction" or "the exercise of jurisdiction" or "power to try and determine causes". In common parlance it means taking notice of. A court, therefore, is precluded from entertaining a complaint or taking notice of it or exercising jurisdiction if it is in respect of a public servant who is accused of an offence alleged to have been committed during discharge of his official duty. 10. Such being the nature of the provision the question is, how should the expression, "any offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty", be understood? What does it mean? "Official", according to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of the Union, of the Central Government; (b) in the case of a person who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of a State, of the State Government. Provided that where the alleged offence was committed by a person referred to in clause (b) during the period while a Proclamation issued under cluse (1) of Article 356 of the Constitution was in force in a State, clause (b) will apply as if for the expression "State Government" occurring therein, the expression "Central Government" were substituted. Explanation.- For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that no sanction shall be required in case of a public servant accused of any offence alleged to have been committed under section 166-A, section 166-B, section 354, section 354-B, section 354-C, section 354-D, section - 370, section 375, section 376 [Section 376-A, 376-AB, section 376-C, section 376-D, section-376DA, section 376-DB] or section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)" 7. Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure....