Amidst a raging debate on whether the UP governor was justified in not according sanction for prosecution of state Chief Minister Mayawati in the Taj Corridor scam case, the Supreme Court has held that the sanctioning authority is the best person to judge whether a public servant who has been charged with corruption should be protected.

The HC dismissed an appeal by the state government against the order of the Karnataka HC in a corruption case. The bench comprising Justices S B Sinha and H S Bedi said, “The order of sanction does not indicate application of mind by the sanctioning authority, as it reflects the views of the police.”

“Ordinarily, the sanctioning authority is the best person to judge as to whether the public servant concerned should receive the protection under the Act by refusing to accord sanction for his prosecution or not,” the court said.

The Karnataka HC, in its order, had reversed the order of the subordinate court which convicted Ameer Jan, a second division assistant in the office of the Registrar of Firms and Cooperative Societies. He had been convicted under the   Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs 300 from Thrilochan for issuing a certificate.

Ameer Jan had challenged his conviction before the HC, pleading that the Commissioner of Stamps, the head of the department, granted the sanction for his prosecution on July 20, 1999, without applying his mind. He  had solely based the report on the statement of the Inspector General of Police, Karnataka Lokayuktha.

The High Court, in its order, had held that “the order of sanction being illegal, the judgement of conviction could not be sustained.”