IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-23891 of 2009 (O/M). Date of Decision : August 28, 2009. Satbir Singh s/o Shri Ransingh r/o Village Nouch, P.S. Sadar, Kaithal, Tehsil and District Kaithal. ...... Petitioner . Versus. Harpal Singh Patwari posted at Village Nouch, Tehsil and District Kaithal, and others. ..... Respondents . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present:- Mr. Baldev Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner . AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). The contention of counsel for the petitioner in the present case is that Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), is clearly made out against respondents-accused and, therefore, sanction for prosecution under Section 19 of the Act would not be essential as Section 19 of the Act does not envisage the sanction for offence, which is committed other than Sections 7, 10, 11, 13 and 15 of the Act. He on this basis submits that the order passed by the Courts below are not sustainable and summons should have been issued against respondents-accused under Sections 8 and 9 of the Act as well. I have gone through the records of the case. The allegation, which has been made against respondents- accused, is that they are seeking illegal gratification not only for themselves, but for higher authorities. It is not the case that respondents-accused had sought that money for influencing the higher authorities. What he has stated Criminal Misc. No. M-23891 of 2009. in the complaint is that the higher authorities are also wanting share of the the illegal gratification. This position is clearly covered under Section 7 of the Act and Section 8 would not come into operation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The contention raised by counsel for the petitioner, therefore, cannot be accepted, since Section 7 of the Act would be involved, wherein sanction under Section 19 of the Act is mandated to be taken, therefore, the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kaithal, is fully justified and in accordance with law. Finding no merit in the present petition, the same stands dismissed. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE August 28, 2009. sjks. -2-