INTRODUCTION
The Supreme Court of India in recent times gave its verdict in the case of Suneeti Toteja v. State of U.P. & Another, reiterating that there is no such notion of “deemed sanction” under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The aforementioned ruling established that unjustified delay in sanction approval by the sanctioning authority within a reasonable timeframe does not automatically lead to deemed sanction. The judgment is significant judicial interpretation on procedural fairness of prosecution of government servants.
BACKGROUND
The case involved where the appellant, being a government servant, was prosecuted without previous sanction of the respective authority as envisioned under Section 197 CrPC. The argument of prosecution was that as the sanction was not moved within the time, it would be “deemed sanction” by following the precedents in Vineet Narain v. Union of India and Subramanian Swamy v. Manmohan Singh. However, the Supreme Court did not approve this argument and ruled that none of the aforesaid cases enunciated the doctrine of deemed sanction under Section 197 CrPC.
KEY POINTS
- No Deemed Sanction under CrPC: Particularly held by the Court that Section 197 CrPC does not envision deemed sanction and prosecution cannot be launched in the absence of sanctions of the concerned authority.
- Distinction with Vineet Narain Case: The Court pointed out that Vineet Narain mostly concerned with the investigative jurisdiction and procedure of the CBI and the Central Vigilance Commission, and not Section 197 CrPC.
- Clarification of Subramanian Swamy Case: It made it clear that the principles enunciated in Subramanian Swamy were guidelines to Parliament and not yet part of law.
- Effect of New Criminal Law (BNSS, 2023): The Court recognized that the new Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) has a deemed sanction provision. Under Section 218(1) of BNSS, if the sanctioning authority does not make the decision within 120 days, it is presumed that the sanction has been accorded.
- Quashing of Proceedings: Since the sanction had been withheld categorically by the concerned authority, the Supreme Court held that the initiation of the process was vitiated. The chargesheet, order to summon, and all proceedings against the appellant were quashed.
RECENT DEVELOPMENT
The ruling brings into perspective the necessity of pre-sanction before prosecuting government servants in accordance with the CrPC. Yet, since the BNSS, 2023, has come into force, the law will be amended since deemed sanction will now be granted under the new act. This kind of amendment would likely affect subsequent cases related to prosecution of government servants.
CONCLUSION
The Supreme Court ruling in Suneeti Toteja v. State of U.P. & Another reiterates the requirement of law-making to obtain express sanction under Section 197 CrPC before prosecuting a public servant. Although the judgment establishes the current legal scenario in compliance with the CrPC, it also targets the imminence of change in the form of BNSS, 2023, where deemed sanction has been included. The case will be a benchmark for such cases until BNSS is functional in its full capacity.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY: SHIVRANJNI
