It has been held by the Supreme Court that the criminal proceedings can be instituted any time after retirement, in respect of an act of employee (which amounts to an offence under criminal law) or incident taken place while the employee was in service. However the pension whole or in part, permanently or for specific period can be withdrawn or withheld, only if the judicial proceedings are instituted after his retirement in respect of a cause of action which arose or in respect of an event which took place not more than four years before institution of such proceedings.(ref. State of Punjab v/s Kailash Nath, 1989 AIR SC 558.)
A sanction of the competent authority is required for prosecuting a public servant under prevention of corruption Act or for the offences under Indian Penal Code. The question is whether such sanction is required while prosecuting a public servant under provisions of Prevention of corruption Act and I.P.C.This question has been once again dealt in the judgement delivered by the supreme court on 17-12-2014 in the case of State of Punjab v/s Labh Singh and has held as under,
1) No sanction for prosecution a public servant under provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 is required if the public servant is retired before the date of cognizance by the Court.
2) The sanction of the competent authority is required when a retired public servant is to be prosecuted under provisions of Indian Penal Code.
The judgement in this case along with the following material relating to the topic has been made available at S.N. 36 under the caption " Disciplinary Proceedings- Important Judgments"
1) Supreme Court of India judgement in case of S. A. Venkataraman vs The State
2) Supreme court judgement in case of Manzoor Ali Khan vs Union Of India & othres
3) Article by Advocate Ashok Dhamija
These judgements and other material can be got downloaded, if required.
A sanction of the competent authority is required for prosecuting a public servant under prevention of corruption Act or for the offences under Indian Penal Code. The question is whether such sanction is required while prosecuting a public servant under provisions of Prevention of corruption Act and I.P.C.This question has been once again dealt in the judgement delivered by the supreme court on 17-12-2014 in the case of State of Punjab v/s Labh Singh and has held as under,
1) No sanction for prosecution a public servant under provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 is required if the public servant is retired before the date of cognizance by the Court.
2) The sanction of the competent authority is required when a retired public servant is to be prosecuted under provisions of Indian Penal Code.
The judgement in this case along with the following material relating to the topic has been made available at S.N. 36 under the caption " Disciplinary Proceedings- Important Judgments"
1) Supreme Court of India judgement in case of S. A. Venkataraman vs The State
2) Supreme court judgement in case of Manzoor Ali Khan vs Union Of India & othres
3) Article by Advocate Ashok Dhamija
These judgements and other material can be got downloaded, if required.
