‘Can’t interpret section 17A in manner which defeats the objective of PC Act’

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Monday told former Andhra Pradesh chief minister N Chandrababu Naidu, arrested in the Skill Development Corporation scam, his contention of mandatory prior approval before conducting an inquiry in a corruption case will be viewed in a way that the object of the Prevention of Corruption Act does not get defeated.

Section 17A was introduced by an amendment with effect from July 26, 2018 and the provision stipulates a mandatory requirement for a police officer to seek prior approval from the competent authority for conducting any enquiry or inquiry or investigation into any offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act).

“While interpreting section 17A, we have to see that the very object of the Act to counter corruption does not get defeated. We cannot adopt an interpretation which will frustrate the objective of the Act,” a bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi said.

The remarks by the top court came after senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing with lawyer Siddharth Luthra for the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) leader, submitted that section 17A was inserted by Parliament to keep a check on harassment of a public servant, who has taken a decision while discharging his official duty.

The top court is hearing Naidu’s plea challenging the high court order refusing to quash the FIR against him in the Skill Development Corporation scam case.