In Brief
The State challenged a High Court order that quashed the taking of cognizance against a former Minister accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The High Court had reasoned that the Trial Court, having once deferred cognizance, could not later take it—treating the deferment as a final order whose revision was prohibited. The Supreme Court held that a mere deferment pending submission of sanction documents is not a 'final order' under Section 362 of the CrPC, and therefore the Trial Court could properly take cognizance once clarified that no sanction was legally required. The appeal was allowed and the case remanded to the High Court to consider whether such sanction was actually necessary.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.