Gujarat High Court in the recent case of Rajatkumar Kantibhai v. State of Gujarat observed that “Society has become a victim to the rampant corrupt practice of the public servant”.
It also remarked that private citizen’s right to file complaints against a public servant and to obtain sanction for prosecuting public servants flows from the rule of rule. The court added that the Anti-corruption bureau is set up in the state under the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 where the aggrieved can move his application.
The single bench of Justice Gita Gopi, while hearing the application under section- 482 of the Crpc, and Article-226 of the Indian Constitution highlighted that the intention behind the enactment of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by the legislature was to make effective provisions for the prevention of bribe and corruption activities amongst the public servants and to have a speedy inquiry and investigation against such government officers which are indulging in such illegal practices.
In the present case, the Applicant made an allegation against the I.O and an officer of DSP Squad, had demanded a bribe for his release on Bail. The counsel of the Applicant mentioned that although the Applicant was granted Bail on February 17th, 2019 but because of the non-fulfillment of the demands of officers they kept on threatening the applicant till date. Therefore, in order to seek protection, the Applicant filed an instant petition under Section 482 of Crpc.
The court pointed out that the ambit and scope of prevention of Corruptions Act,1988 has been explained in the case of M.Narayanan Nambiar v. State of Kerala.
It also pointed out that Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, lays down that no court shall take cognizance of an offense punishable under Sections 7, 11, 13, and 15 unless a complaint is filed in the competent court.