English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Supreme Court notice to Modi govt on plea against amendment to corruption law

Published

8 years ago

on

SUPREME-COURT

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The Supreme Court today (Monday, Nov 26) issued notice to Narendra Modi government on a plea challenging constitutional validity of amendments made to the Prevention of Corruption Act in July this year making it difficult for probe agencies to expeditiously act on complaints of graft against serving and retired bureaucrats.

The amendment to the anti-graft law mandates prior sanction before starting a probe against a serving or retired government servant in a corruption case.

The Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Ajay Rastogi was hearing a petition filed by the Center for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL).

The petition seeks a review of Section 17A of the PC Act which mandates that the still-to-be-formed Lokpal at the Centre and the Lokayuktas in States will have powers to approve initiation of inquiries against all serving and retired bureaucrats upon receipt of any complaint of graft against them. The Centre has been asked to respond to the notice within six weeks.

The Centre notified amendments to the PC Act on July 26 this year. The amended anti-graft law introduced stringent penalties for bribe givers and bribe seekers once their culpability in the act was proven but, on the other hand it made the investigative process more cumbersome.

Many anti-graft crusaders had, at the time of the passage of the amended legislation, mocked the law as one that should be called Protection (and not Prevention) of Corruption Act”.

The provision of prior sanction also introduces an element of government discretion and preference in choosing which official should be proceeded against and who should be spared.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1543225561723{border-top-width: 10px !important;border-right-width: 10px !important;border-bottom-width: 10px !important;border-left-width: 10px !important;padding-top: 10px !important;padding-right: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 10px !important;padding-left: 10px !important;background-color: #cecece !important;border-radius: 10px !important;}”]The amended Section 17A of the Act reads thus:

“(1) No police officer shall conduct any enquiry or inquiry or investigation into any offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant under this Act, where the alleged offence is relatable to any recommendation made or decision taken by such public servant in discharge of his official functions or duties, without the previous approval —

(a) in the case of a person who is or was employed, at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed, in connection with the affairs of the Union, of that Government;

(b) in the case of a person who is or was employed, at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed, in connection with the affairs of a State, of that Government;

(c) in the case of any other person, of the authority competent to remove him from his office, at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed:

Provided that no such approval shall be necessary for cases involving arrest of a person on the spot on the charge of accepting or attempting to accept any undue advantage for himself or for any other person:

Provided further that the concerned authority shall convey its decision under this section within a period of three months, which may, for reasons to be recorded in writing by such authority, be extended by a further period of one month.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Critics of the amended Act claim that Section-17A “violates of Article-14, 19 and Article-21 of the Constitution of India” and that it also takes away or abridge the fundamental rights of complainants of fair investigation as well as equality before the law.

The Modi government, on the other hand, has maintained that the amended legislation serves as a strong deterrent against corruption while it also safeguards conscientious bureaucrats against motivated complaints.

Votaries of the amended Act state that it had increased the punishment for those found guilty of offering a bribe from the previous mandated jail term of six months to three years to a more stringent “up to seven years imprisonment”. The amended law also provides for a sentence of “between five to 10 years” for repeat offenders. It also stipulates that investigation and trial against government employees alleged of crimes under that Act must be completed within two years – and if this condition is not met then a maximum extension of another two years may be granted.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

India News

Acharya Balkrishna acquitted in 15-year-old forged documents case

Acharya Balkrishna has been acquitted by a Dehradun CBI court in a 15-year-old case involving allegations of obtaining a passport using forged documents.

Published

12 mins ago

on

September 8, 2026

By

Acharya Balkrishna, a close associate of Yoga Guru Ramdev and general secretary of Patanjali Yogpeeth, has been acquitted in a 15-year-old case involving allegations of obtaining a passport using forged educational and other documents.

The Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI) court in Dehradun also acquitted Naresh Chandra Dwivedi, who was accused of providing the alleged forged documents to Balkrishna.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered the case and began its investigation in 2011 following a complaint alleging that Balkrishna was a Nepali national who had obtained an Indian passport using forged documents.

The case involved allegations related to the procurement of a passport on the basis of forged educational and other documents. After a prolonged legal process, the court acquitted Balkrishna and Dwivedi.

The Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI) court in Dehradun acquitted both accused in the case.

Naresh Chandra Dwivedi was facing allegations of providing forged documents to Balkrishna. The court’s verdict brought the 15-year-old proceedings to an end with the acquittal of both accused.

Continue Reading

India News

Delhi buildings over 50 years old may face safety audits after Satya Niketan collapse

The Centre is considering regular safety audits of DDA buildings more than 50 years old following the deadly Satya Niketan collapse.

Published

34 mins ago

on

September 8, 2026

By

Haryana CM Manohar Lal Khattar

The Centre is considering a plan to conduct safety audits of Delhi Development Authority (DDA) buildings that are more than 50 years old, Union Housing and Urban Affairs Minister Manohar Lal Khattar said on Monday.

The proposal comes a day after a five-storey building in Delhi’s Satya Niketan collapsed, killing seven people and trapping several others under the debris.

Khattar said the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs is examining the proposal for safety audits of older DDA buildings. Under the plan, such buildings could undergo audits at intervals of 10 years, five years and three years.

Safety audits proposed for older DDA buildings

According to the minister, the government is looking at a system under which DDA buildings crossing the 50-year mark would undergo periodic safety assessments.

The proposal is aimed at identifying structural safety concerns in ageing buildings and ensuring that necessary action can be taken.

Khattar also said the Municipal Corporation of Delhi should take action at its own level to prevent similar incidents.

“I am deeply saddened by the heart-wrenching incident that occurred yesterday at Satya Niketan in Delhi,” Khattar said.

Proposal follows Satya Niketan building collapse

The proposed safety audit plan comes after a five-storey building in Satya Niketan, near Delhi University’s South Campus, collapsed on Sunday.

The building collapsed during repair work, killing seven people. Twelve people were rescued during the operation, according to the report.

The incident has renewed concerns about the safety of ageing and vulnerable structures in the national capital.

Khattar’s proposal specifically concerns DDA buildings that are more than 50 years old, while the minister also called for action by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi to prevent such incidents.

Possible audit intervals under consideration

The ministry is considering safety audits at different intervals, including:

  • Every 10 years
  • Every five years
  • Every three years

The details of the proposed system, including how the audits would be implemented, are yet to be finalised.

The proposal comes amid heightened scrutiny of building safety in Delhi following the Satya Niketan collapse.

Continue Reading

India News

Nandigram bypoll on October 6 after Suvendu Adhikari vacates seat

The Election Commission has announced October 6 as the polling date for the Nandigram bypoll, with votes to be counted on October 9.

Published

13 hours ago

on

September 7, 2026

By

Suvendu-Adhikari

The Election Commission has announced the schedule for the Nandigram bypoll in West Bengal, with voting set to take place on October 6. The counting of votes will be held on October 9.

The by-election has been necessitated by Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari vacating the Nandigram Assembly seat after winning the constituency as well as Bhabanipur in the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections. Adhikari decided to retain Bhabanipur and give up his Nandigram seat.

The Election Commission said the poll process will formally begin with the issue of the gazette notification on September 9.

Nandigram bypoll schedule

According to the election schedule, candidates can file their nominations until September 16. The nomination papers will be scrutinised on September 17, while September 19 will be the last date for withdrawal of candidature.

Polling in Nandigram will be conducted on October 6 and votes will be counted on October 9. The Election Commission has said the entire election process will be completed by October 11.

Why is a Nandigram bypoll being held?

The Nandigram Assembly seat fell vacant after Suvendu Adhikari resigned from the constituency.

Adhikari had contested the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections from both Nandigram and Bhabanipur and won both seats. He subsequently chose to retain Bhabanipur and vacate Nandigram, making a by-election necessary for the constituency.

The Nandigram contest is also significant because Adhikari had defeated Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee from the constituency in the 2021 West Bengal Assembly election.

Rejinagar bypoll also scheduled

The Election Commission has also announced a by-election for the Rejinagar Assembly constituency in West Bengal. The Rejinagar seat became vacant after Aam Janata Unnayan Party founder Humayun Kabir gave it up.

Polling for Rejinagar will also be held on October 6, with counting scheduled for October 9.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com