Visit: https://a2zcareers.viden.io
Knowledge in landmark judgements
LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION
The below attachment contains the landmark judgements of the fundamental rights of the Indian constitution. from facts to judgements.
Ramya Thoti
LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION
The below attachment contains the landmark judgements of the fundamental rights of the Indian constitution. from facts to JUDGEMENTS
NOTES ON PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 PART
Section 30 – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: Repeal and saving.—(1) The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (2 of 1947) and the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 (46 of 1952) are hereby repealed.(2) Notwithstanding such repeal, but without prejudice to the application of section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (10 of 1897), anything done or any action taken or purported to have been done or taken under or in pursuance of the Acts so repealed shall, in so far as it is not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, be deemed to have been done or taken under or in pursuance of the corresponding provision of this Act.Meaning and literal explanation: · Section 30(1) states that the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (2 of 1947) and the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 (46 of 1952) have been thusannulled.· Section 30(2) of the act states that there shall be no prejudice towards the application of section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897[1] which states the effect of repeal of any act or any statute, and thus any action being taken or anything done in the pursuance of the acts repealed by the section 30(1) of the said Act, shall stand saved in pursuance of the corresponding provision of this act as long as it does not stand in derogation with any of the provisions of this Act. Need and Importance of section 30 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 :The sole reason of the enactment of the Prevention of corruption Act, 1947 was to prevent the rampant and serious increase in the corruptive practices that came to a rise at the time of independence of our nation. This act was enacted by the parliament because of the extensive bribery and corruption amongst the public servants which had increased enormously on account of the second world war conditions where the disbursement of the public money in large quantities was involved and the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 stood somewhat inadequate in order to stand as a basis for the actions being taken against these corrupt public servants. However this act being a social piece of protection against corruption which was guaranteed by the Constitution of India, was repealed under section 30 (1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. This section also repealed the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1952. However it was stated under section 30(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 that any of the prosecutions in any case law being done by the Indian Judicature shall stand as affirmed even if they were done according the acts which were repealed in the section 30(1) of the said Act as long as these prosecutions did not stand in derogation with the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Practical Application along with Landmark Judgements: Our nation, after its independence became a sovereign power and a democratic republic. However, the post second world war conditions did not improve and the widespread corruptive practices continued. The Government of our country had the responsibility to improve the living conditions and standard of the Indian citizens in every walk of their lives. Therefore, extensive projects had been undertaken by the Central Government as well as the State Government under the Five Year Plans, involving the fair and ample distribution of the public money in the sum of crores when there was a rising temptation of greed for a better fortune and thus this gave a wide scope for the employment of corrupt practices which thereby blocked progress in the nation. This made the Government of our nation realise that there were many loopholes in the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 which stood as hurdles in the rapid progress of our nation and therefore this act was repealed under section 30(1) of the new act formulated with the same name in the year 1988. This act was enacted thus for a more effective prevention of corruption and curbing of the cases of bribery in our country. Now, any individual whether related to any public entity or being a private individual, if found trying to grab certain funds belonging to the public and planning certain conspiracies with corrupt beings thereby standing liable for these corroding practices will not be able to escape liability and shall be charged under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Apex court of the nation in the case, ‘State of West Bengal v. Manmal[2]’ had precisely dealt with this issue wherein it held that even private individuals who are or were involved in the corruptive practices along with the public servants were liable to be tried under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The court in the case, ‘Ramesh Chand Jain v. State of Madhya Pradesh[3]’ said that if any case of corruption prior to the enactment of the POC Act in 1988 was dealt with under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, it will stand to be considered as completely legal and valid as long as it did not violate any of the provisions of the act enacted with the same name in 1988. This concept was explained even better by the High Court of New Delhi in the case, Virendra Singh v. Central Bureau of Investigation[4]. To make the operations of the anti- corruptive laws even more effective in our nation, the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was legislated and had the object of dealing with the circumstances, contingencies and shortcomings which were observed whilst the act of 1947 was enacted and was under operation in India. These steps also led to the repeal of the Criminal Laws amendment Act of 1952 as per section 30 of the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988. In the case ‘C.B.I. v. ‘Subodh K. Dutta’[5], the cognizance of the offence taken by the Special Court under the 1947 act stood saved as per the Section 30 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.Thus explained the Section 30 of the act enacted in 1988 saves the essence of the act of 1947 as well as the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1952. This repeal did not curb the active procedures of stopping the corruptive practices in India but also maintained the supremacy of the Law over the land. [1]https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1030013/[2]1977 Cr. L.J. 1164 (S.C.): A.I.R. 1977 S.C. 1772.[3] 1991 Cr. L.J. 2957 at 2959 (M.P.)[4]W.P (CRIMINAL) NOS. 765/2010 & 871/2010 [5] 199Cr. L.J. 1173 ; A.I.R. 1997 S.C. 869.