Pune, The Bombay High Court has set aside orders by the then Pune municipal commissioner refusing sanction for an open inquiry against a former civic official, clearing the way for a probe into alleged disproportionate assets worth around ₹2,000 crore.
A division bench of Justices A S Gadkari and Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale on Thursday quashed the April 16 and April 25, 2019, orders issued by then Pune Municipal Corporation Commissioner Saurabh Rao.
As PMC chief, Rao had denied prior approval to the Anti-Corruption Bureau to initiate an open inquiry against former city engineer Prashant Waghmare, who retired earlier this year after serving as the chief city engineer for more than 22 years.
The court held that the competent authority had exceeded its jurisdiction by effectively conducting a parallel assessment of the allegations and arriving at a conclusion that no case was made out, instead of limiting itself to examining whether a prima facie case existed for granting approval.
The bench noted that the complaint, filed in 2016, alleged that Waghmare amassed assets worth nearly ₹2,000 crore, disproportionate to his known sources of income, when he was with the PMC. The complaint also alleged that the assets were routed through family members and multiple companies linked to them.
The ACB had initially conducted a discreet inquiry, during which the officer concerned recorded that Waghmare did not fully cooperate and failed to provide crucial details relating to his assets, investments, foreign travel, the education expenses of his son, and financial transactions. In view of the nature and scale of allegations and lack of cooperation, the ACB officer had recommended initiation of an open inquiry.
However, the then Municipal Commissioner declined to grant sanction, relying on explanations and documents submitted by Waghmare, and concluded that no case of disproportionate assets was made out. This led to the closure of the confidential enquiry by the ACB.
Setting aside the civic chief’s orders, the HC observed that such an approach was legally untenable. It said that while considering approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, the competent authority is not expected to conduct a detailed inquiry or adjudicate on the merits of the allegations.
The section mandates prior approval from the competent authority before conducting any inquiry or investigation into offences allegedly committed by public servants in the discharge of official duties.
“A public servant’s integrity must be beyond suspicion. Where the authorised enquiry officer has material casting doubt on such integrity, an enquiry must follow in the interest of the individual, the institution and society,” the judges said.
The competent authority cannot block this process by exceeding its limited powers under Section 17 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, as doing so would amount to a “misuse of power and abuse of the legal process”, the order said.
The court further noted that cases involving disproportionate assets do not fall within the protective ambit of prior approval under Section 17A, as they are not related to decisions taken in discharge of official duties.
Relying on judicial precedents, the bench emphasised that the role of the competent authority is limited to assessing whether the material placed by the investigating agency justifies further probe, and not to determine the guilt or innocence of the public servant at a preliminary stage.
It also added, “It appears that the then municipal commissioner, in an overzealous attempt to protect its officer, has taken upon himself the role of the enquiry officer.”
The court also said that corruption is an enemy of the nation and tracking down a corrupt public servant, however high he may be, and punishing such a person is a necessary mandate under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Corruption by public servants not only corrodes the moral fabric of society but is also harmful to the national economy and national interest, it said.
The HC said that persons occupying high posts in the government, when they misuse their power due to corruption, can cause considerable damage to the national economy, national interest, and the country’s image.
By quashing the then PMC chief’s decision, the court has effectively paved the way for the ACB to proceed with an open inquiry into the allegations against Waghmare.
The petition challenging the civic commissioner’s decision was filed by a Pune-based activist, Tanaji Gambhire, seeking a fair investigation into the alleged disproportionate assets case.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
