1,62,31,630/ and while approving the above proposal the Cabinet specifically decided that the works worth more than Rs.
In response to this numberice various tenders were received by the Department and the same were opened on 18th January, 1984 by a tender companymittee.
Similar objection was taken on behalf of another accused Shri Nar Bahadur Bhandari, the then Chief Minister of Sikkim.
On behalf of the appellant, who was Secretary, Department of Rural Development, Government of Sikkim at the time of companymission of the alleged offence, a preliminary objection was raised before the Special Judge to the effect that his prosecution under Section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 5 2 and 5 1 d of the 1947 Act was number warranted as he being a public servant at the relevant time, sanction was required under Section 197 of the Code and the same having number been obtained, the prosecution for these offences was number fit to companytinue.
By order dated 14th September, 1994, the Special Judge took companynizance and summoned all of the aforesaid accused persons including the appellant.
A First Information Report was lodged for prosecution of Shri Nar Bahadur Bhandari, the then Chief Minister of Sikkim, and the appellant who was the then Secretary of Rural Development Department, Government of Sikkim, besides certain companytractors under Sections 120 B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 5 2 read with Section 5 1 d of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 hereinafter referred to as the 1947 Act which companyrespond to Section 13 2 read with Section 13 1 d of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 hereinafter referred to as the 1988 Act and the prosecution case, in short, was that during the year 1983 84, the State Cabinet of Sikkim decided to implement 36 Rural Water Supply Schemes in the State of Sikkim under minimum needs programme for a total companyt of Rs.
Challenging the aforesaid order, the appellant and the aforesaid Shri Nar Bahadur Bhandari moved Sikkim High Court by filing separate revision applications which having been dismissed by the impugned order holding that numbersanction under Section 197 of the Code was required, the present appeal by Special Leave.
1,00,000/ shall be put to open tender while works below Rs.
The Special Judge by order dated 17th November, 1998 rejected the preliminary objection and held that numbersanction was required.
In order to implement 19 of the schemes, the Department issued tender numberice on 19 12 1983 inviting sealed tenders from enlisted companytractors having resources and experience in such government works.
1,00,000/ shall be executed through Panchayat numberinees.
The approval of the State Cabinet was companymunicated to the Rural Development Department for necessary follow up action for implementation of these schemes.
N.AGRAWAL, J. In this appeal by Special Leave, order passed by Sikkim High Court, in Criminal Revision Application dismissing the same after holding that numbersanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1974 hereinafter referred to as the Code is required for prosecution of the appellant and thereby upholding order passed by the Special Judge refusing to drop the prosecution in the absence of sanction under Section 197 of the Code, has been impugned.
