Corruptionby a publicservant is a offense versus the State and society and the courts cannot treat such cases as “suits for specific performance,” the Supreme Court said Thursday.
A bench of Judges SA Nazeer and V Ramasubramanian made the observation while quashing a Madras High Court order that quashed a criminal complaint in a cash-for-work scam on the basis of an agreement between the parties.
“This is needless to say that Corruptionby a publicservantis a offenseversus the State and society in general. The Court cannot hear cases involving abuse of official position and the adoption of corrupt practices, such as lawsuits, where reimbursement of monies paid may also satisfy the holder of the agreement.
“Therefore, we believe the High Court made a complete error in quashing the criminal complaint,” the bench said.
The plaintiff in the case had filed an affidavit in the High Court supporting the defendant and asking for the case to be quashed on the grounds that what the victims had with the defendant was only a financial dispute and that the one -it was settled amicably.
He argued that due to the political rivalry between the two groups, his complaint escalated into a more serious complaint isprosecute. The victims, who originally claimed to have paid money to secure employment, also filed individual affidavits supporting the defendant.
When the motion in cassation has been heard, the lawyer appearing for the State The government argued that the incident took place in 2014 and that a compromise was reached between the accused and the victims in the same year.
The high court took note of the submissions and quashed the criminal complaint.
The Supreme Court said courts should be slow to exercise their jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings based on a settlement reached between the parties when the offenses are likely to have an impact not only on the complainant and the accused, but also on others. The Supreme Court said it could not ignore the fact that candidates, who are selected and appointed to government positions/public companies by engaging in corrupt practices, are ultimately called upon to render public service.
“This is needless to say that the quality of public service rendered by these people will be inversely proportional to the corrupt practices adopted by their. “Therefore, the publicwho benefit from these services, also become victims, albeit indirectly, because the consequences of such appointments sooner or later affect the work carried out by the named ones. Thus, to say that the appellants do not have standing is deny the existence of this is obvious,” the bench said while reinstating the criminal complaint.
(Except for the title, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)