Supreme Court in Dilemma: Anti-Corruption Provision Faces Split Verdict

The Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Justice Nagarathna deems it unconstitutional, while Justice Viswanathan upholds it with conditions. The decision is deferred to Chief Justice for broader examination.

The Supreme Court's decision on the controversial Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, has ended in a split verdict, sparking significant legal discourse. Justice B V Nagarathna declared the provision unconstitutional, indicating it protects corrupt officials and hinders genuine investigations.

Conversely, Justice K V Viswanathan upheld the section, emphasizing the necessity to protect public servants from baseless allegations. He suggested that prior sanctions should be managed by independent bodies like the Lokpal.

The matter now escalates to Chief Justice Surya Kant for further examination, following divergent opinions on the provision's legitimacy, initially challenged by a public interest litigation filed by CPIL.

(With inputs from agencies.)