The Supreme Court, in Tejaram v. State of Rajasthan (2026 INSC 1147), has held that Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 does not apply where a public servant is accused of demanding illegal gratification, as the demand of bribe was “a pure criminal act unconnected to discharge of the official functions or duties”, and so fell outside the protection of Section 17A.
Section 17A requires previous approval before any enquiry, inquiry or investigation into an offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant that is relatable to a recommendation made or decision taken by them in the discharge of official functions or duties. A bribe demand has no such connection.
In reaching this view, the Court relied on:
- CBI v. Santosh Karnani (2023 SCC OnLine SC 427), decided on 17 April 2023. Section 17A is not attracted where the accusation does not concern any recommendation or decision of the public servant.
- Anil Daima v. State of Rajasthan (2026 INSC 72), decided on 19 January 2026. Section 17A cannot be applied to cases of demand of illegal gratification.
- Shankara Bhat v. State of Kerala (Kerala High Court). Criminal acts such as receiving a bribe, which have no connection with official duty, lie outside the protective ambit of Section 17A.
