Newdelhi, Oct 19, 2026 16:10 IST: Prior approval is not required to investigate an alleged bribe demand by a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act because such an activity has no connection to the discharge of official duties, the Supreme Court has ruled.

A bench comprised of Justices S V N Bhatti and N V Anjaria issued the observation while dismissing an appeal filed by Rajasthan police constable Tejaram against a trial court decision to frame a corruption charge. The judgment was officially delivered on October 16.

Justice Anjaria, writing the judgment for the bench, sustained the Rajasthan High Court decision refusing to interfere with the trial court order framing a charge against Tejaram under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Section 7, amended in 2018, outlines penalties for public servants who take, accept, or attempt to secure an undue advantage to perform a public duty improperly or dishonestly.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's contention that the investigating authority had failed to secure prior approval under Section 17A of the statute. This particular provision mandates prior approval before launching any inquiry or investigation into specific offenses connected to decisions or recommendations made by public servants during the execution of their official responsibilities.

Referring to past precedents, the court emphasized that offenses such as criminal breach of trust, falsification of records, cheating, misappropriation, and accepting bribes fall entirely outside the reach of Section 17A. The bench noted that the statutory wording itself defines and limits the operational scope of the rule, with the critical phrase anchoring it to the discharge of official duties or functions.

The court observed that the legislature enacted Section 17A to shield public servants from legal harassment over matters tied to their official responsibilities, but clarified that the safeguard lacks an omnibus application. For the provision to trigger, there must be a definitive decision or recommendation rendered by the public servant while carrying out official duties.

According to the case records, Tejaram was stationed at the deputy superintendent of police office in Sirohi, Rajasthan. A fellow constable named Devendra Kumar submitted an email grievance alleging that Tejaram requested Rs 1.5 lakh on behalf of the superintendent of police.

Following the complaint, law enforcement registered an FIR under Section 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code regarding criminal conspiracy, leading to Tejaram's arrest later that year. Prosecution sanction was subsequently granted under Section 19 of the Act, paving the way for a chargesheet and the framing of charges by a special court in Pali, Rajasthan.

After the Rajasthan High Court rejected his revision petition, Tejaram elevated the matter to the Supreme Court. By dismissing the appeal, the apex court reinforced that Section 17A protection strictly applies to official decisions and recommendations rather than covering allegations of soliciting or receiving bribes.