The SC had held that if the public servant had been transferred from the post in which the alleged offence took place, then there is no requirement for prior sanction to prosecute.
MUMBAI: A special Prevention of Corruption Act court has ordered that an FIR be registered by the anti-Corruption Bureau, against Vishwas Patil, former Mumbai suburban collector and chief executive officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA), his wife and two developers, Ramji Shah and Rasesh Kanakia.
Special judge A D Tankhiwale passed the order on a private complaint filed by a Malad resident and shop occupant, Hitendra Yadav, who alleged Vishwas Patil and others conspired to hand over a large government area as free sale plot, where Kanakia is constructing a luxury project called,
Kanakia Levels. The allegation is that Patil, as Mumbai suburban district collector, conveyed a government land at Malad east to developer Ramji Shah, after his wife was made director in Shah’s Company. In a slum rehabilitation scheme, 44% extra land was given for development to the Kanakias, alleged Yadav’s lawyer Aditya Pratap.
Pratap argued that since Patil,a public servant, had retired in June, the law does not require any prior sanction to prosecute him in a corruption case. He cited three Supreme Court judgements, including a leading case of L Naranayana Swamy vs Karnataka which carved out a scenario when a public servant loses protection from harassment. The SC had held that if the public servant had been transferred from the post in which the alleged offence took place, then there is no requirement for prior sanction to prosecute.
Public prosecutor J V Desai opposed the plea stating that criminal procedural law doesn’t allow court to take cognizance of any offence by a public servant, except with prior sanction. The judge said, "The allegations involving criminal breach of trust and criminal conspiracy are serious and considering the facts, definitely an ACB investigation would be necessary." The judge said, "PCA, a special statute, prevails over the general law" and that going by the SC verdict "sanction is not warranted before referring the complaint to the ACB". He allowed Yadav’s plea and directed the ACB to register a FIR and investigate it in two months.
When contacted, Patil denied any wrongdoing. "I have not passed any files pertaining to this project as CEO, SRA. When I was collector, the land was acquired by additional collector (encroachment) for slum project. This land is not government land. As a collector I gave the land on lease to slum society as a routine matter. I have nothing to do with these builders. As a collector or even as a SRA, I did not grant any FSI to the society. On the contrary, there were complaints, so I issued inquiry on some points in last month even before the court order. There is no question of favouring anyone here."
Kanakia, when contacted, said, "We entered as joint venture partners in 2013 after all clearances were obtained and when almost 80 percent of land was already vacant and rehabilitation buildings were up." He said, "To my knowledge not a single file in this case had gone for approved to Patil when he was CEO, SRA." He said, "I don’t think anyone has done any wrong in this matter. We will pursue the case in court."
Ramji Shah said, "Yadav is a Malad resident who had earlier also gone to court against us when the SRA scheme and now a case is pending before the high power committee. We have committed no crime."
Pratap later said, "This is a significant order because senior bureaucrats think they have the protection of a prior sanction from government before any FIR is registered against them by ACB. Other cases under PCA which are stuck for want of sanction may now move on."
