No Obligatory Requirement To Secure Prior Sanction For Institution Of FIR Against A Public Servant: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court’s position on the no obligatory requirement to secure prior sanction for institution of FIR against a public servant,
No Obligatory Requirement to Secure Prior Sanction for Institution of FIR Against a Public Servant: Allahabad HC
Context:
In India, public servants enjoy certain protections under various statutes, primarily to shield them from frivolous or vexatious litigation in the discharge of their official duties. One such protection is the requirement to obtain prior sanction from the competent authority before initiating prosecution or certain legal proceedings against them.
Issue:
Whether the prior sanction is mandatory before registering a First Information Report (FIR) against a public servant or whether it is only necessary before the commencement of prosecution.
Allahabad High Court’s Position:
The Allahabad High Court has clarified that there is no mandatory or obligatory requirement to secure prior sanction for the institution of FIR against a public servant. The requirement of sanction generally applies to the prosecution stage, not at the initial stage of lodging the FIR.
Reasoning:
Distinction Between FIR and Prosecution:
FIR is the first step in the criminal justice process where the police record information about a cognizable offence.
Prosecution involves filing a charge sheet and taking the accused to trial before a court of law.
The courts have repeatedly held that the requirement of sanction applies at the prosecution stage and not while lodging the FIR.
Purpose of Sanction:
The purpose of prior sanction is to protect public servants from unnecessary harassment and to maintain discipline within the administration.
It does not mean to grant immunity from investigation or inquiry.
Thus, investigation, including registration of FIR, can proceed without sanction.
Safeguards against misuse:
The power to grant or refuse sanction rests with the competent authority.
If an FIR is registered without sanction, the validity of the investigation or prosecution may be challenged later.
But, the registration of FIR itself is not barred.
Case Laws Supporting this Position:
1. State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335
The Supreme Court laid down the broad principles for quashing FIRs and stated that registration of FIR is a preliminary step and sanction for prosecution is a separate requirement.
The Court emphasized that FIR registration should not be interfered with unless it is malicious or vexatious.
2. K.K. Verma vs. Union of India, AIR 1960 SC 572
The Supreme Court held that prior sanction is necessary only for prosecuting public servants, not for initiating investigation or lodging FIRs.
3. Kalyan Chandra Sarkar vs. Rajesh Ranjan & Ors. (2005) 2 SCC 42
The Court observed that prior sanction is required before prosecution and not before the initiation of an investigation or registration of an FIR.
4. P.V. Narasimha Rao vs. State (CBI/SPE) (1998) 4 SCC 626
The Supreme Court reiterated that sanction for prosecution is a preliminary question and must be considered before prosecution, but it does not restrain registration of an FIR.
5. Bhagat Ram vs. State of Punjab (2013) 4 SCC 165
The Court clarified that prior sanction is a condition precedent only to prosecution and trial but not to investigation or FIR registration.
6. Allahabad High Court Specific Ruling:
The Allahabad High Court in various rulings held that FIR registration against a public servant does not require prior sanction.
The Court emphasized that the process of investigation should not be stalled merely on the ground that prior sanction is yet to be obtained.
Sanction becomes relevant only at the stage of prosecution to ensure that only genuine cases proceed to trial.
Summary:
Filing an FIR against a public servant does not require prior sanction.
Sanction is mandatory only before the prosecution (trial) commences.
This distinction ensures that investigations can be initiated promptly and without undue delay.
Public servants are protected from unwarranted prosecution but not from investigations or FIR registration.
The courts maintain a balance between protecting public servants and ensuring accountability.
RELATED Blog
0 comments