State ACB Can Register PC Act Case Against Central Employee; Section 17-A Not for Bribe Demands: Supreme Court

The petitioners, who are sought to be prosecuted under Sections 7 and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, had filed Criminal Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 450 and 451 of 2025, which the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur disposed of on 3.10.2025 (paras 1, 5). The High Court asked whether the State ACB may register, investigate and charge-sheet a corruption case against a Central Government employee in Rajasthan, or whether only the CBI may, so that the ACB needs its consent; and whether an ACB charge-sheet filed without that consent is valid (para 2). It answered both against the petitioners (para 3), who before the Supreme Court also sought the benefit of Section 17-A (para 4).

The Court noted that the High Court, after considering the law and various decisions of this Court, had recorded a categorical finding that the ACB of the State of Rajasthan has jurisdiction to register a Prevention of Corruption Act case although the accused is a Central Government employee. It held that the High Court had taken the correct view in saying that it is incorrect to say that only the CBI could have instituted the prosecution (para 3). On Section 17-A, the Court first clarified that the petitioners face prosecution under Sections 7 and 7A and that this is a case of demand of illegal gratification (paras 5-6). Extracting the provision, it observed that Section 17-A was enacted with a particular object and speaks of enquiry, inquiry or investigation of offences relatable to recommendations made or decisions taken by a public servant in discharge of official functions or duties (paras 6-7). By any stretch of imagination it cannot be applied to cases of demand of illegal gratification; the plea was thoroughly misconceived and was rejected at the threshold (paras 7-8). The order cites no decision.