- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Kerala High Court
- /
- Centre's Sanction U/S 188 CrPC...
Centre's Sanction U/S 188 CrPC Required Only When Entirety Of The Offence Is Committed Outside India: Kerala High Court
Manju Elsa Isac
24 May 2024 4:30 PM IST
The Kerala High Court has made it clear that Section 188 CrPC, which deals with prosecution of offences committed outside India, is attracted only when the entirety of the offence is committed outside India.The provision requires prior sanction of the Central government to inquire or try such cases in India.Single bench of Justice K. Babu held there is no need to get previous sanction from...
The Kerala High Court has made it clear that Section 188 CrPC, which deals with prosecution of offences committed outside India, is attracted only when the entirety of the offence is committed outside India.
The provision requires prior sanction of the Central government to inquire or try such cases in India.
Single bench of Justice K. Babu held there is no need to get previous sanction from the Central Government when the entirety of the offence did not happen outside India. It followed the 3-bench decision of Supreme Court in Sartaj Khan v State of Uttarakhand and observed,
“A Three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Sartaj Khan v State of Uttarakhand (2022 LiveLaw (SC) 321) held that if the offence was not committed on its entirety, outside India, the matter would not come within the scope of Section 188 Cr.P.C. and there is no necessity of any sanction as mandated by the proviso to Section 188. In view of the settled law, the contention of the petitioner relying on Section 188 Cr.P.C. fails.”
The bench was dealing with an application seeking to quash the FIR registered against the petitioner, booked under Sections 406, 408, 420 and 467. Petitioner is alleged to have unauthorizedly withdrawn money from its employer in the Sultanate of Oman and deposited in his bank accounts in Kollam and Ernakulam.
The petitioner's case was that he had not misappropriated any amount and in any case, he said. the investigating agency had not obtained the sanction to investigate as required by the proviso to Section 188 of CrPC.
The Court said that in the proceedings instituted for quashing, the materials relied on by the petitioner should be of impeccable quality, which was not the case herein. The Court further observed that the petitioner failed to convince it that the allegation levelled against him in the prosecution records do not disclose the ingredients of the offences alleged.
The case was accordingly dismissed.
Counsel for Petitioner: Advocates C. Unnikrishnan, Vivek Nair P., Uthara A.S., Vijayakrishnan S. Menon
Counsel for Respondents: Public Prosecutor G Sudheer
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 302
Case Title: M. Amanulla Khan v Sajeena Vahab and Others
Case No: Crl.M.C. No. 5290/2019
