'Claim of duty can't be used as shield for corrupt deeds'

A prior sanction mandated to prosecute government officials cannot be treated as “shield” to protect corrupt officials as the procedure is only a safeguard to them from malicious or vexatious prosecution, the Supreme Court has held.

In a strong message to government servants, the apex court said that the officials indulging in criminal offence cannot take refuge under the garb of doing public duty for such misconduct.

“Public servants have, in fact, been treated as special category under Section 197 Criminal Procedure Code, to protect them from malicious or vexatious prosecution. Such protection from harassment is given in public interest; the same cannot be treated as shield to protect corrupt officials,” a bench of Justices Kurian Joseph and Adarsh Kumar Goel said.

The court rejected a plea by a group of employees of Andhra Pradesh's sub-registrar office, challenging their prosecution for cheating and misappropriation by undervaluing properties at the time of registration.

“The alleged indulgence of the officers in cheating, fabrication of records or misappropriation cannot be said to be in discharge of their official duty. Their official duty is not to fabricate records or permit evasion of payment of duty and cause loss to the revenue,” the bench said.

The court said there was no doubt that when the officials indulged in the alleged criminal conduct, they had been working as public servants.

“The question is not whether they were in service or on duty or not but whether the alleged offences have been committed by them “while acting or purporting to act in discharge of their official duty”, the bench said, setting aside the AP High Court's order.

Finding no wrong in the magisterial court's decision to take cognisance against the officials, the apex court directed the trial court to dispose of by December 31 the criminal proceedings initiated against them in 1999.