Supreme Court judges divided on anti-corruption law: Justice Nagaratna said Section 17A is unconstitutional, while Justice Vishwanathan said striking down the provision would be like throwing the baby out with the bathwater

The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments on the mandatory requirement of obtaining prior permission before initiating investigations against government employees in corruption cases. A bench of Justices Nagarathna and Viswanathan delivered a split verdict on the matter.

The case concerns the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act), which mandates obtaining government permission before investigating any government employee. This provision is the subject of the dispute.

During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna stated that Section 17A is unconstitutional and that prior permission is not necessary for any investigation. Conversely, Justice Viswanathan held that Section 17A is constitutionally valid, stating that striking down this provision would be like “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”

Justice Viswanathan further added that abolishing this provision would be more harmful than the disease itself, provided that the approval for investigation is determined by the Lokpal or the State Lokayukta.

Case referred to the Chief Justice of India

Due to the differing opinions of Justices Nagarathna and Viswanathan, the case has now been referred to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Suryakant. The Supreme Court stated that the Chief Justice will constitute a larger bench to hear the matter and deliver a final judgment.

Hearing on NGO’s petition

The case arose from a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the NGO Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL). Representing the petitioner, Prashant Bhushan argued before the Supreme Court that this provision weakens the anti-corruption law, as the government often denies permission for investigations. The central government was represented by Tushar Mehta.

Separately, the Supreme Court on Monday heard a petition challenging the provision granting lifelong legal immunity to Election Commissioners for their actions. The court issued notices to the central government and the Election Commission, seeking their responses. The bench headed by CJI Suryakant said, “We would like to examine this. We are issuing notice.”