Overview

 The Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PCA, 1988). This section requires prior government approval before investigating a public servant for offences committed in their official capacity. 

Background

•  In 1962, the Central government formed a committee under K. Santhanam to address corruption, leading to the PCA, 1988. 
•  The act consolidated laws against bribery and criminal misconduct by public servants. 

Definitions

• Public Servant: Includes government employees, judges, and those performing public duties. 
• Public Duty: Duties in which the government or public has an interest. 

Sections of PCA

• Section 19: Requires prior government sanction for prosecuting public servants. 
• Section 17A (Introduced in 2018): Requires prior approval for inquiries into decisions made by public servants. 

Judicial Decisions

• Vineet Narain vs. Union of India (1998): Supreme Court struck down an executive order requiring prior sanction for investigations. 
• Dr Subramaniam Swamy vs. Director, CBI (2014): Struck down Section 6A of  the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act (DSPE Act) as violative of Article 14. 

Current Verdict

• Justice K. V. Viswanathan: Supported Section 17A but with independent agency approval, linking it to the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. 
• Justice B. V. Nagarathna: Deemed Section 17A unconstitutional, citing it conflicts with Article 14 and existing protections under Section 19. 

Proposed Reforms

•  Swift case disposal for public servants as a deterrent against corruption. 
•  Penalties for false complaints to deter vexatious accusations.