Court emphasizes judicial review and hearing before revocation of pardon under CrPC Sections 306 and 308.
In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court has dismissed the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) petition seeking revocation of pardon granted to two approvers in a corruption case involving customs officials at Bengaluru International Airport. The judgment, delivered by Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde, underscores the necessity of judicial consideration and the hearing of approvers before the revocation of pardon can occur, rejecting the notion of automatic cancellation upon a prosecutor's certificate.
The case revolves around accused individuals Shiva Murthy S.K. and Keshavamurthy P, who were initially implicated in a corruption scandal involving customs officials and clearing house agents. They turned approvers and were granted pardon under Section 306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), contingent on their full and truthful disclosure regarding the offenses. However, during the trial, the CBI alleged that the approvers had breached the terms of their pardon by supporting the defense during cross-examination.
The High Court clarified that the issuance of a certificate by the Public Prosecutor under Section 308(1) of the CrPC does not automatically lead to the revocation of a pardon. Instead, the court highlighted the discretionary power vested in it to assess whether a prima facie case exists for such revocation, emphasizing that the approvers must be heard in this process.
The judgment further explained that new facts revealed during cross-examination do not inherently constitute a violation of the pardon terms. The prosecution retains the option to seek re-examination to address any ambiguities or new information that emerges.
Notably, the court also pointed out procedural lapses by the CBI, indicating that they failed to seek the High Court's leave to prosecute the approvers for allegedly giving false evidence, a requirement under the proviso to Section 308(1).
This ruling reinforces the judicial safeguards in place for approvers, ensuring that their rights are protected and that any action to revoke a pardon is based on a thorough judicial review rather than an automatic response to prosecutorial claims. The High Court's decision serves as a reminder of the careful balance between prosecutorial actions and judicial oversight within the Indian legal framework.
Bottom Line:
Revocation of pardon granted to approvers under Sections 306 and 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requires judicial consideration and hearing of the approvers. It cannot be automatic merely upon issuance of a certificate by the Public Prosecutor.
Statutory provision(s): Section 306, Section 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 138 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Central Bureau Of Investigation v. Shiva Murthy S K, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2851185
