New Delhi, Jan 13 (NationPress) The Supreme Court delivered a split decision regarding the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act on Tuesday.

This particular section requires prior approval from the competent authority before launching any inquiry or investigation against a public servant for actions taken while performing official duties.

A division bench comprised of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice K.V. Viswanathan issued separate judgments concerning the challenge to Section 17A, which was amended in 2018.

Justice Viswanathan affirmed the constitutional validity of Section 17A, stating that it aims to safeguard honest public servants from trivial and malicious complaints that could lead to administrative dysfunction.

He further emphasized that the authority to grant permission for investigations should be entrusted to an independent body such as the Lokpal or Lokayukta, rather than the government.

"If honest public servants lack assurance that their decisions won't be subject to frivolous complaints, it is the nation that ultimately suffers. This can lead to a 'play-it-safe' mentality, causing policy paralysis. The remedy of striking down the provision may prove more detrimental than the issue itself," Justice Viswanathan remarked.

He dismissed worries regarding potential misuse, asserting, "The argument for striking down Section 17A due to the possibility of abuse lacks merit. The mere potential for misuse of a valid provision cannot justify declaring it unconstitutional."

In contrast, Justice Nagarathna deemed the provision unconstitutional, claiming it violates Article 14 of the Constitution. She argued that Section 17A creates an unjustifiable classification by providing protection solely to a specific category of public servants — those involved in higher-level decision-making — while excluding others from similar protections.

"Section 17A of the Act is struck down because it infringes upon Article 14 of the Constitution, as it seeks to shield only a specific class of public servants. The classification based on duty nature is both illegal and discriminatory," she stated.

Justice Nagarathna also mentioned, "Requiring prior approval to protect honest officers does not justify the provision's constitutionality, as a regime of prior approval contradicts the fundamental objectives of the Act and must be invalidated for that reason as well."

Due to these conflicting opinions, the issue has been referred to the Chief Justice of India to form an appropriate bench for resolution.