Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Prevention of Corruption Act

50 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

BANSHI DHARversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

2006 INSC 76431 October 2006Dismissed

Banshidhar, a Patwari, was suspended in 1976 on allegations of accepting illegal gratification and was convicted under Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with Section 161 of the IPC. He was dismissed in 1987 but later acquitted by the appellate court in 2001. By the time of his acquittal he had al

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusSUNIL TRIPATHI ETC. ETC.

2018 INSC 65331 July 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined appeals by the Union of India and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against a Delhi High Court order that directed the CBI to convert three preliminary enquiries into FIRs/RCs and to complete the investigation. The CBI argued that its preliminary enquiries concluded there was no invol

SULEKH CHAND AND SALEK CHANDversusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS.

1994 INSC 42830 September 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, police officers promoted from Assistant Sub‑Inspector to Sub‑Inspector, claimed that their promotion should be back‑dated to 1 October 1982. The respondents, the Commissioner of Police, denied the promotion on the ground that the officers had been charged under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corrupti

A.R. ANTULAYversusR.S. NAIK & ORS.

1986 INSC 22329 October 1986Dismissed

The petition sought revocation of special leave that had been granted by the Supreme Court in the presence of the respondents' counsel after hearing. The Court examined whether it could set aside its own order of special leave, considering the procedural propriety of the original grant and the constitutional implicatio

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusRAMDAS SHRINIVAS NAYAK & ANR.

1982 INSC 5728 July 1982Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra filed a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 challenging a Bombay High Court order that the Governor should exercise his own discretion, not the advice of the Council of Ministers, when deciding whether to grant sanction under Section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act for the prosecutio

SWISS TIMING LIMITEDversusORGANISING COMMITTEE, COMMONWEALTH GAMES 2010 DELHI

2013 INSC 36228 May 2013Case Allowed

Swiss Timing Ltd., a Swiss company, entered into a contract with the Commonwealth Games 2010 Organising Committee to provide timing and scoring services. The Committee failed to pay the agreed fees, prompting Swiss Timing to invoke the arbitration clause in the agreement. The Committee objected, claiming the contract w

LOUIS PETER SURINversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

2010 INSC 43427 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

An FIR was lodged in April 1984 under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code alleging that the appellant, then Managing Director of a district agency, conspired with a Deputy Commissioner to award a contract to a private firm. The State Government denied sanction for prosecution on two occasions (19

NARINDER SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2014 INSC 21727 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashment of an FIR registered under Sections 307, 324, 323 and 34 IPC after the accused and complainant settled their dispute through a village Panchayat. The High Court had refused to accept the compromise, relying solely on the seriousness

SUKHRAMversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2016 INSC 55325 July 2016Dismissed

The case concerned Sukh Ram, a Gram Sewak, who was alleged to have forged loan applications and misappropriated government funds between 1983 and 1986. During the investigation, an executive magistrate obtained specimen signatures of two witnesses, which were later compared by a handwriting expert who testified that th

R. SAI BHARATHIversusJ. JAYALALITHA AND ORS.

2003 INSC 66824 November 2003Dismissed

The State alleged that the Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation (TANSI) sold land at a price below market value to a firm in which the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and her associate were partners, thereby causing wrongful loss to the corporation and wrongful gain to the accused. The trial court convicted the accused

SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusA. RAJA

2012 INSC 35224 August 2012Rejected

Dr. Subramanian Swamy filed a criminal complaint alleging that former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram conspired with Telecom Minister A. Raja in the 2G spectrum scam, seeking to make Chidambaram an accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Special Judge, after examining the material, found no evidence of Chid

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD AND ANR.versusP. KATA RAO

2008 INSC 52924 April 2008Dismissed

The Managing Director of State Bank of Hyderabad initiated departmental proceedings against P. Kata Rao, an employee, on twelve charges, some of which overlapped with criminal charges for which he was later acquitted. The enquiry officer found him guilty of most charges and the appointing authority dismissed him; the d

THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENTversusM. GOPAL REDDY & ANR

2023 INSC 16324 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) appealed against a Telangana High Court order that granted anticipatory bail to M. Gopal Reddy (respondent No.1) under Section 438 of the CrPC in connection with a money‑laundering case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The Supreme Court examined whether the

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION (ADMINISTRATION), MADRASversusS. NAGOOR MEERA

1995 INSC 13624 February 1995Appeal(s) allowed

S. Nagoor Meera, a Superintendent in the Collegiate Education Department, was convicted under IPC s.420 and the Prevention of Corruption Act s.5 and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment. The High Court suspended the sentence and released him on bail. The Deputy Director issued a show‑cause notice seeking his dis

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL

2013 INSC 77422 November 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India suspended an Indian Revenue Service officer in 1999 pending two CBI criminal investigations; the Central Administrative Tribunal later quashed the suspension and directed a review, but the government issued fresh suspension orders in 2012 without complying with the Tribunal’s directions, leading the

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.versusKAILASH NATH ETC.

1988 INSC 35222 November 1988Disposed off

Kailash Nath, a retired Executive Engineer, was charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act for the purchase of sign boards in 1979; the FIR was filed in 1985, three years after his retirement and six years after the alleged misconduct. He challenged the FIR invoking the third proviso of Rule 2.2(b) of the Punjab Ci

SEEMANT KUMAR SINGHversusMAHESH PS & ORS.

2023 INSC 27221 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

During bail proceedings of a police officer (Respondent No.1) under Section 439 Cr.PC, the Karnataka High Court made adverse remarks against three appellants – a senior IPS officer (Appellant No.2) and a district collector (Appellant No.3) – who had no lis in the bail matter, and also directed the CBI to investigate th

DEPOT MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusMOHD. YOUSUF MIYA ETC.

1996 INSC 134920 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Depot Manager of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation initiated disciplinary proceedings against driver Mohd Yousuf Miya under Regulation 28(ix) of the Employees Conduct Rules, 1963 after a fatal accident caused by his alleged failure to anticipate the incident. Simultaneously, the driver faced criminal

STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.versusKALICHARAN MOHAPATRA AND ANR.

1995 INSC 58820 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

K. Mohapatra, a retired IPS officer, faced a criminal prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. While the case was pending, the State of Orissa withheld his gratuity and refused to sanction his final pension, granting only a provisional pension. Mohap

STATE OF PUNJABversusCHARAN SINGH

1981 INSC 4520 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Charan Singh, a police officer, was convicted under sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Punjab High Court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution was invalid because the police department had not complied with Rule 16.38 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. On appeal, the Supreme Court e

RAGHUBIR SINGH & OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1986 INSC 19519 September 1986Dismissed

The petitioners, five accused including Simranjit Singh Mann, were arrested near the Indo‑Nepal border and charged with offences under the Indian Penal Code, while being detained under the National Security Act. They were granted bail under the proviso to Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, but could not be

SAMPAT SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1992 INSC 35618 December 1992Dismissed

Petitioners, comprising 16 MLAs and 3 MPs, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a CBI investigation into alleged corruption by Minister Bhajan Lal and the setting aside of a magistrate's order of discharge. The High Court dismissed the petition without addressing the petitioners' locus standi, prompting a Sp

STATE OF PUNJABversusDEEPAK MATTU

2007 INSC 95118 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a public servant, was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to 18 months' rigorous imprisonment. He appealed the conviction and, under Section 389 of the CrPC, sought suspension of the conviction; the Special Court granted it, and the High Court upheld the suspension. The State

M.C. MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ON BEHALF OF MONITORING COMMITTEE

2003 INSC 49518 September 2003

The Supreme Court, hearing a writ petition under Article 32 filed by environmental activist M.C. Mehta on behalf of a Monitoring Committee, examined the Taj Heritage Corridor project undertaken near the Taj Mahal. The Court found that construction and river‑bed reclamation work had commenced without the mandatory clear

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSH. B.R. BAJAJ AND ORS.

1994 INSC 1218 January 1994

The Union of India and the Delhi Special Police Establishment appealed against a Punjab & Haryana High Court order that quashed an FIR registered under sections 120‑B, 418, 468 IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act against Shri B.R. Bajaj, the Finance Secretary of Chandigarh, and several tenderers. The FIR alleged t

C.B.IversusPRADEEP BHALCHANDRA SAWANT AND ANR.

2007 INSC 83917 August 2007Dismissed

The Central Bureau of Investigation appealed against the High Court's order granting bail to Deputy Commissioner of Police Pradeep Bhalchandra Sawant, who was arrested in the stamp‑paper scam and charged under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) for allegedly facilitating the organised crime by delib

ASLAM BABALAL DESAIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1992 INSC 24515 September 1992

The appellant was arrested for offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 323 read with 149 IPC and, after the investigating agency failed to file a charge‑sheet within the 90‑day period prescribed by the proviso to Section 167(2) of the CrPC, the Sessions Judge released him on bail. After the charge‑sheet was later fil

STATE OF TAMIL NADUversusA. JAGANATHAN

1996 INSC 73615 July 1996Disposed off

The State of Tamil Nadu appealed against the Madras High Court’s order that suspended the convictions and sentences of four public servants, including A. Jaganathan, who had been convicted under IPC sections 392, 218, 466 and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The High Court had relied on Rama Narang v. Ramesh Narang, h

ANJU CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2012 INSC 60613 December 2012Dismissed

The case concerned whether a second FIR could be registered in relation to communal violence in Gorakhpur and whether the accused was entitled to a hearing before such registration. The appellant, Anju Chaudhary, challenged a High Court order directing the magistrate to register a new FIR under Section 156(3) CrPC, arg

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusARUN KUMAR AGARWAL AND ORS.

1999 INSC 55513 December 1999Case Partly allowed

Arun Kumar Agarwal and others filed a writ petition in the Karnataka High Court seeking the cancellation of a 1,000 MW thermal power project at Mangalore and the registration of a FIR for alleged corruption. The High Court, without detailed analysis, directed the CBI to investigate based on thirteen points of alleged s

INDERJIT SINGH AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1995 INSC 39613 July 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the convictions of several government officers accused of embezzling funds allocated for a rural employment scheme in Punjab. The prosecution relied on the report of a Superintending Engineer, thumb‑impression comparisons, alleged extra‑judicial confessions and circumstantial evidence to prov

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusDR. KRISHNA CHANDRA SAKSENA

1996 INSC 118511 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. K.C. Saksena, a medical officer, was caught in a trap for allegedly demanding a bribe. After investigation, the State Government granted sanction for prosecution under Section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Before a challan could be filed, Saksena invoked Section 482 of the CrPC and obtained a stay; the Hig

ABDULLA MOHAMMED PAGARKARversusSTATE (UNION TERRITORY OF GOA, DAMAN AND DIU)

1979 INSC 17811 September 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a public servant (A‑1) and a contractor (A‑2) who were charged with conspiracy to cheat the Government by preparing inflated bills, false muster rolls and false statements for a canal‑deepening project. The prosecution alleged that the number of labourers and the work done were grossly exaggerated, re

HARDEO SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2000 INSC 31811 May 2000Dismissed

Hardeo Singh, a contractor, obtained overdraft facilities totalling Rs 21.5 lakh from the Birpur branch of Central Bank of India, facilities that were beyond the authorised limit of the branch manager, S.K. Roy, who was alleged to habitually receive illegal gratification from a third party. Although the FIR named only

DIVINE RETREAT CENTREversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2008 INSC 34111 March 2008Case Allowed

A female remand prisoner alleged sexual exploitation by the head of Divine Retreat Centre and complained of police bias. The High Court, acting suo motu on a petition addressed to a single judge and an anonymous letter, ordered the withdrawal of the police investigation of the rape case and constituted a Special Invest

STATE OF PUNJABversusRAJ KUMAR

1988 INSC 4011 February 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Assistant Sub‑Inspector, was caught taking a bribe and was investigated and charge‑sheeted in a criminal trial. He challenged the framing of charges on the ground that the investigation violated Rule 16.38 of the Punjab Police Rules. The High Court held the rule to be mandatory and applicable to crim

YASHWANT SINHA & ORS.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR & ANR.

2019 INSC 50510 April 2019

The petitioners challenged the CBI's reliance on three documents that were allegedly taken without authorization from the Ministry of Defence and marked secret under the Official Secrets Act. The respondents argued that the review petition was untenable because the documents violated Sections 3 and 5 of the Official Se

T. LAKSHMI NARASIMHA CHARI ETC.versusHIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS ETC.

1996 INSC 6509 May 1996Disposed off

The appellant, a District Munsif who had been temporarily promoted to Subordinate Judge, was removed from service by the Andhra Pradesh High Court after a departmental inquiry found him guilty of misconduct. He appealed to the Governor under Rule 21(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and A

SHEILA KAUL THROUGH MS. DEEPA KAULversusSTATE THROUGH C.B.I.

2013 INSC 6928 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former Union minister, was charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the IPC for offences of corruption and criminal conspiracy. She applied to the trial court for exemption from personal appearance, citing her 98‑year age, severe heart disease and senile dementia, and a medical board report t

GOLD QUEST INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2014 INSC 6118 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Gold Quest International Private Limited, a numismatic company, faced an FIR under Section 420 IPC and Sections 4, 5, 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation (Banning) Act after several customers alleged non‑delivery of promised gold coins. All claimants, including the primary complainant, settled their disputes wit

RAKESH KUMAR GOEL ETC.versusU.P. STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.

2010 INSC 3848 July 2010Dismissed

The appellants Rakesh Kumar Goel and others purchased two government plots in Ghaziabad through an auction purportedly held under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1952. The High Court set aside the auction on the ground that the appellants failed to deposit the required 25% of the bid immed

SHASHIKANTversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7927 November 2006Dismissed

Shashikant, a railway employee, lodged an anonymous complaint with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleging corruption by several officers. The CBI conducted a preliminary inquiry without registering a First Information Report (FIR) and recommended departmental action, which was carried out. Shashikant was la

SUDHIR SHANTILAL MEHTAversusC.B.I.

2009 INSC 10357 August 2009Disposed off

The case concerned the discounting and rediscounting of two bills of exchange by UCO Bank, allegedly to provide funds to stock‑broker Harshad Mehta for securities transactions. The Supreme Court examined whether the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 had jurisdiction over

K.KARUNAKARANversusSTATE OF KERALA

2006 INSC 9646 December 2006Disposed off

The appellant, K. Karunakaran, was prosecuted for an alleged abuse of office. The High Court held that no sanction under CrPC Section 197 was required because the appellant was not holding the office at the time the court took cognizance of the offence. The appellant further contended that the prosecution was driven by

VIJAY KUMAR NIGAM (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 12996 November 1996Dismissed

V.K. Nigam, a Sub‑Inspector, was found to have received illegal gratification from a gambling organiser and was dismissed from service after a departmental inquiry. He challenged the dismissal, contending that he was not furnished with the preliminary inquiry report, violating natural justice, and that the statement of

GROSONS PHARMACEUTICALS (P) LTD. AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

2001 INSC 4275 September 2001Dismissed

Grosons Pharmaceuticals Ltd., an approved contractor for supplying drugs to the Uttar Pradesh government, was blacklisted after a vigilance inquiry uncovered irregularities and a criminal prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120 IPC was launched. The State issued a show‑cause notice, the appel

THE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.versusSURYAKANT CHUNILAL SHAH

1998 INSC 4583 December 1998Dismissed

The respondent, S.C. Shah, an Assistant Food Controller (Class II) in Gujarat, was accused of issuing bogus cement permits and fabricating a government stamp, leading to his suspension and two FIRs under the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act. A Review Committee was convened under Rule 161 of the Bo

KISHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

1992 INSC 2972 November 1992Appeal(s) allowed

Kishan Singh was convicted under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment. He appealed to the Allahabad High Court under Section 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code, but the High Court dismissed the appeal for default because neither he nor his counsel appeared,

COMMON CAUSE"REGISTERED SOCIETY THROUGH ITS DIRECTORversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 6051 May 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ under Article 32 filed by the registered society "Common Cause" seeking relief for under‑trial prisoners and accused persons in pending criminal matters. The Court observed that prolonged pendency of criminal cases infringes the right to life and liberty guaranteed b

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search