Case Law Details
George Varghese Vs Superintendent of Police (Karnataka High Court)
Held that invalidity of sanction is different from absence of sanction and the point is to be raised during the trial.
Facts-
It is the allegation of the prosecution that, accused No.1, i.e. the present petitioner, while functioning as a public servant, in the capacity of the Superintendent of Customs, EOU-IV Range, Department of Customs, Bangalore, during January-2003, entered into a criminal conspiracy with accused No.2 – the Inspector of Customs, EOU-IV Range, Bangalore, and accused No.3 – the Chief Executive Officer of accused No.4 and in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy, cleared the container No.CLHU-262095-4 containing the goods meant for export by accused No.4, without physically verifying the same before sealing the container, which caused wrongful loss to the Government of India, to the tune of `26,94,251/- and corresponding wrongful gain to themselves and thus all the accused have committed the offences punishable under Sections 120B read with Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC and Sections 13 (2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
After investigation, charge sheet came to be filed before the Special Court. Cognizance was taken and the presence of the accused was secured. When the matter was at the stage of hearing before charge, accused Nos.1 to 3 including the present petitioner who is accused No.1 in the charge sheet, filed applications under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C., seeking their discharge from the case.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
