Supreme Court of India
Digital Supreme Court Reports
The Official Law Report Fortnightly ISSN: 3048-4839 (Online)
Home

ANIL KUMAR & ORS. vs. M. K. AIYAPPA & ANR.

SCR Citation: [2013] 9 S.C.R. 869
Year/Volume: 2013/ Volume 9
Date of Judgment: 01 October 2013
Petitioner: Anil Kumar & Ors.
Disposal Nature: Appeals Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2013 INSC 666
Judgment Delivered by: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.S. Panicker Radhakrishnan
Respondent: M. K. Aiyappa & Anr.
Case Type: CRIMINAL APPEAL / 1590-1591 /2013
Order/Judgment: Judgment
1. Headnote

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:ss.197 rlw ss.190, 200 and 156(3) CrPC and s.19 of thePC Act - Complaint u/s 200 against a public servant -Previous sanction not obtained - Special Judge directinginvestigation to be conducted by DSP, Lokayukta - Held:Once it is noticed that there was no previous sanction, theMagistrate cannot order investigation against a public servantwhile invoking powers u!s. 156(3) Cr.P.C. - The Special Judge 0has stated no reason for ordering investigation -- High Courthas rightly quashed the order of Special Judge as well as thecomplaint - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - s. 14.ss.156(3) r/w s.190 - Power of Magistrate to orderinvestigation - Held: A Magistrate, who is otherwisecompetent to take cognizance, has the power to refer a privatecomplaint for police investigation u/s. 156(3) Cr.P.C. -- Whena Special Judge refers a complaint for investigation u/s.156(3) Cr.P.C., obviously, he has not taken cognizance of theoffence and, therefore, it is a pre-cognizance stage andcannot be equated with post-cognizance stage.

2. Case referred
3. Act
      No Data Found!!!!!
4. Keyword
  • Prevention of Corruption Act
  • post-cognizance stage
  • pre-cognizance stage