This flowchart outlines the typical legal process for obtaining sanction for prosecution, especially for public servants, highlighting the critical steps involved.
This flowchart outlines the typical legal process for obtaining sanction for prosecution, especially for public servants, highlighting the critical steps involved.
Evidence Collection & Prima Facie Case Assessment
Filing of Chargesheet in Court
Is Sanction Required? (e.g., Public Servant, specific offenses)
Application for Sanction to Competent Authority (Govt. Dept.)
Sanctioning Authority Reviews Evidence & Applies Mind
Sanction Granted?
This table compares the provisions for sanction for prosecution under Section 197 of the CrPC and Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, highlighting their key differences and applicability.
| Aspect | Section 197, CrPC (1973) | Section 19, Prevention of Corruption Act (1988) |
|---|---|---|
| Applicability | Public servants for acts 'in discharge of official duty' (general offenses) | Public servants for offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act (corruption-related offenses) |
| Purpose | Protects public servants from vexatious or malicious prosecution for official acts | Ensures genuine cases of corruption proceed, while preventing harassment |
| Authority | Central/State Government (depending on employment) | Central/State Government (depending on employment) |
| Stage Required | Before court takes cognizance of the offense | Before court takes cognizance of the offense |
| Nature of Offenses | Any offense committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of official duty (e.g., assault, criminal breach of trust) | Specific offenses defined in the PC Act (e.g., taking bribe, criminal misconduct) |
| Time Limit for Decision | No strict statutory limit, but SC suggests 3-4 months | No strict statutory limit, but SC suggests 3-4 months |
| Judicial Review | Decision can be reviewed by courts for arbitrariness or non-application of mind | Decision can be reviewed by courts for arbitrariness or non-application of mind |
💡 Highlighted: Row 1 is particularly important for exam preparation
Evidence Collection & Prima Facie Case Assessment
Filing of Chargesheet in Court
Is Sanction Required? (e.g., Public Servant, specific offenses)
Application for Sanction to Competent Authority (Govt. Dept.)
Sanctioning Authority Reviews Evidence & Applies Mind
Sanction Granted?
This table compares the provisions for sanction for prosecution under Section 197 of the CrPC and Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, highlighting their key differences and applicability.
| Aspect | Section 197, CrPC (1973) | Section 19, Prevention of Corruption Act (1988) |
|---|---|---|
| Applicability | Public servants for acts 'in discharge of official duty' (general offenses) | Public servants for offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act (corruption-related offenses) |
| Purpose | Protects public servants from vexatious or malicious prosecution for official acts | Ensures genuine cases of corruption proceed, while preventing harassment |
| Authority | Central/State Government (depending on employment) | Central/State Government (depending on employment) |
| Stage Required | Before court takes cognizance of the offense | Before court takes cognizance of the offense |
| Nature of Offenses | Any offense committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of official duty (e.g., assault, criminal breach of trust) | Specific offenses defined in the PC Act (e.g., taking bribe, criminal misconduct) |
| Time Limit for Decision | No strict statutory limit, but SC suggests 3-4 months | No strict statutory limit, but SC suggests 3-4 months |
| Judicial Review | Decision can be reviewed by courts for arbitrariness or non-application of mind | Decision can be reviewed by courts for arbitrariness or non-application of mind |
💡 Highlighted: Row 1 is particularly important for exam preparation
लोक सेवकों द्वारा कथित तौर पर अपने आधिकारिक कर्तव्य के निर्वहन में कार्य करते समय या कार्य करने के बहाने किए गए अपराधों के लिए दंड प्रक्रिया संहिता (CrPC) की धारा 197 के तहत आवश्यक है।
लोक सेवकों द्वारा भ्रष्टाचार से संबंधित अपराधों के लिए भ्रष्टाचार निवारण अधिनियम, 1988 के तहत आवश्यक है।
मंजूरी देने के लिए सक्षम प्राधिकारी आमतौर पर सरकार (केंद्र या राज्य) या नियुक्ति प्राधिकारी होता है।
मंजूरी देने वाले प्राधिकारी को मंजूरी देने या अस्वीकार करने से पहले मामले के तथ्यों और सबूतों पर अपना दिमाग लगाना चाहिए।
मंजूरी देने या अस्वीकार करने का निर्णय न्यायिक समीक्षा के अधीन है।
उद्देश्य यह सुनिश्चित करना है कि लोक सेवकों को झूठी या तुच्छ शिकायतों से परेशान न किया जाए।
मंजूरी देने में देरी भ्रष्ट अधिकारियों के अभियोजन को बाधित कर सकती है।
सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने मंजूरी अनुरोधों पर समय पर निर्णय लेने की आवश्यकता पर जोर दिया है।
वैध मंजूरी के अभाव में पूरा अभियोजन अमान्य हो सकता है।
This flowchart outlines the typical legal process for obtaining sanction for prosecution, especially for public servants, highlighting the critical steps involved.
This table compares the provisions for sanction for prosecution under Section 197 of the CrPC and Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, highlighting their key differences and applicability.
| Aspect | Section 197, CrPC (1973) | Section 19, Prevention of Corruption Act (1988) |
|---|---|---|
| Applicability | Public servants for acts 'in discharge of official duty' (general offenses) | Public servants for offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act (corruption-related offenses) |
| Purpose | Protects public servants from vexatious or malicious prosecution for official acts | Ensures genuine cases of corruption proceed, while preventing harassment |
| Authority | Central/State Government (depending on employment) | Central/State Government (depending on employment) |
| Stage Required | Before court takes cognizance of the offense | Before court takes cognizance of the offense |
| Nature of Offenses | Any offense committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of official duty (e.g., assault, criminal breach of trust) | Specific offenses defined in the PC Act (e.g., taking bribe, criminal misconduct) |
| Time Limit for Decision | No strict statutory limit, but SC suggests 3-4 months | No strict statutory limit, but SC suggests 3-4 months |
| Judicial Review | Decision can be reviewed by courts for arbitrariness or non-application of mind | Decision can be reviewed by courts for arbitrariness or non-application of mind |
यह अवधारणा 1 वास्तविक उदाहरणों में दिखाई दी है अवधि: Mar 2026 से Mar 2026
लोक सेवकों द्वारा कथित तौर पर अपने आधिकारिक कर्तव्य के निर्वहन में कार्य करते समय या कार्य करने के बहाने किए गए अपराधों के लिए दंड प्रक्रिया संहिता (CrPC) की धारा 197 के तहत आवश्यक है।
लोक सेवकों द्वारा भ्रष्टाचार से संबंधित अपराधों के लिए भ्रष्टाचार निवारण अधिनियम, 1988 के तहत आवश्यक है।
मंजूरी देने के लिए सक्षम प्राधिकारी आमतौर पर सरकार (केंद्र या राज्य) या नियुक्ति प्राधिकारी होता है।
मंजूरी देने वाले प्राधिकारी को मंजूरी देने या अस्वीकार करने से पहले मामले के तथ्यों और सबूतों पर अपना दिमाग लगाना चाहिए।
मंजूरी देने या अस्वीकार करने का निर्णय न्यायिक समीक्षा के अधीन है।
उद्देश्य यह सुनिश्चित करना है कि लोक सेवकों को झूठी या तुच्छ शिकायतों से परेशान न किया जाए।
मंजूरी देने में देरी भ्रष्ट अधिकारियों के अभियोजन को बाधित कर सकती है।
सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने मंजूरी अनुरोधों पर समय पर निर्णय लेने की आवश्यकता पर जोर दिया है।
वैध मंजूरी के अभाव में पूरा अभियोजन अमान्य हो सकता है।
This flowchart outlines the typical legal process for obtaining sanction for prosecution, especially for public servants, highlighting the critical steps involved.
This table compares the provisions for sanction for prosecution under Section 197 of the CrPC and Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, highlighting their key differences and applicability.
| Aspect | Section 197, CrPC (1973) | Section 19, Prevention of Corruption Act (1988) |
|---|---|---|
| Applicability | Public servants for acts 'in discharge of official duty' (general offenses) | Public servants for offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act (corruption-related offenses) |
| Purpose | Protects public servants from vexatious or malicious prosecution for official acts | Ensures genuine cases of corruption proceed, while preventing harassment |
| Authority | Central/State Government (depending on employment) | Central/State Government (depending on employment) |
| Stage Required | Before court takes cognizance of the offense | Before court takes cognizance of the offense |
| Nature of Offenses | Any offense committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of official duty (e.g., assault, criminal breach of trust) | Specific offenses defined in the PC Act (e.g., taking bribe, criminal misconduct) |
| Time Limit for Decision | No strict statutory limit, but SC suggests 3-4 months | No strict statutory limit, but SC suggests 3-4 months |
| Judicial Review | Decision can be reviewed by courts for arbitrariness or non-application of mind | Decision can be reviewed by courts for arbitrariness or non-application of mind |
यह अवधारणा 1 वास्तविक उदाहरणों में दिखाई दी है अवधि: Mar 2026 से Mar 2026