Karnataka HC: Section 17A PC Act approval needed even for pre-2018 conduct, if probed later

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a Lokayukta investigation against several Ballary and Vijayapura municipal officers accused of corruption and forgery, because it was launched without the prior approval required under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Section 17A, inserted by a 2018 amendment, bars an investigation into any decision or recommendation made by a public servant in discharge of official functions unless the competent authority first approves it. The officers argued that since the acts under investigation occurred before 2018, Section 17A could not apply. Rejecting this, the Court held that Section 17A is procedural rather than substantive: it creates no new liability and does not dilute any existing offence, but merely adds a safeguard for the investigating officer to observe, protecting honest officials from vexatious prosecution.

Applying settled principles on the retrospective operation of statutes, the Court held that because Section 17A does not expressly say otherwise, it governs any investigation commenced after 26 July 2018, the date of the amendment, regardless of whether the official decision being investigated predates that amendment. As the Lokayukta investigation here proceeded without the mandatory prior approval, it quashed the investigation and directed the investigating officer to now seek approval under Section 17A, to be decided within the statutory time frame. This is a Karnataka High Court ruling binding within that State, not a Supreme Court precedent.