Centre for Public Interest Litigation Vs Union of India (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court Upholds Section 17A Prevention of Corruption Act: Prior Approval Is a Valid Shield for Honest Decision-Making
The Supreme Court, in a landmark Constitution Bench–strength ruling, upheld the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, introduced by the 2018 Amendment, which mandates prior approval before any enquiry, inquiry or investigation against a public servant in respect of recommendations made or decisions taken in discharge of official duties.
The petitioners argued that Section 17A effectively revived the discredited ‘prior sanction’ regime struck down earlier in Vineet Narain and Subramanian Swamy, violated Articles 14 and 21, diluted the mandate of Lalita Kumari, conflicted with the Lokpal Act, and created scope for arbitrariness and shielding of corrupt officials. It was also contended that the provision foreclosed even a preliminary enquiry, thereby crippling independent investigation.
Rejecting these challenges, the Court drew a clear qualitative distinction between the erstwhile Section 6A of the DSPE Act and the present Section 17A. Unlike Section 6A, which was confined to senior officers and vested control in the executive, Section 17A applies uniformly to all public servants, is narrowly tailored to cover only acts “relatable to recommendations or decisions taken in official capacity”, and excludes trap cases and on-the-spot arrests. The Court emphasized that not all acts of public servants are protected, and the provision does not extend to acts unconnected with official decision-making.
