Sabit Khan Vs. State of M.P. and others

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

WRIT PETITION, 7818 of 2021, Judgment Date: Aug 12, 2021

Law laid down - 

1. Section 19 of the PC Act requires previous sanction for prosecution. Sub section (3) thereof puts a rider that absence of or any error, irregularities etc. in sanction will not be a ground to reverse a finding or sentence unless in the opinion of the Court failure of justice has infact occasioned thereby. Sub section (4) thereof relates to raising an objection in this regard at an early stage in the proceedings.

2. The Act of granting sanction is an administrative function. It is imperative that the sanctioning authority must apply his mind while granting sanction and in case of challenge the prosecution is required to establish that the sanction was granted by the sanctioning authority after being satisfied that a case was made out for sanction. Since the Court does not sit in appeal against the order of sanction, therefore, adequacy of material produced before the sanctioning authority cannot be gone into. The elaborate discussion of material in the sanction order is not necessary and if a challenge to the sanction order on this ground is raised then the relevant material can be produced before the Court during the course of trial to establish that it was produced for consideration before the sanctioning authority.

3. The issue relating to absence of sanction or the order of sanction being a nullity can be raised at the threshhold but a challenge to the order of sanction on the ground that it suffers from the defect of improper application of mind or non-consideration of relevant material is required to be raised during the trial and establish by leading evidence when the prosecution will also have an opportunity to produce all the relevant material as also examine the sanctioning authority.

Sabit Khan Vs. State of M.P. and others