Sign in
Prevention of Corruption Act

Anil Daima v. State of Rajasthan 2026 INSC 72 - S.17A Prevention Of Corruption Act - Investigation By ACB

CaseCiter

• 1 min read

Prevention of Corruption Act 1988- Anti-Corruption Bureau of the State of Rajasthan has jurisdiction to register the criminal case under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act despite the fact that the accused is an employee of the Central Government- It is incorrect to say that it is only the CBI who could have instituted the prosecution. (Para 3)

Prevention of Corruption Act 1988- Section 17A - Cannot be applied to cases of demand of illegal gratification- Section 17-A talks about enquiry or inquiry or investigation of offences relatable to recommendations made or decision taken by public servant in discharge of official functions or duties. (Para 7)

Case Info


  • Case name and neutral citation: Anil Daima etc. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 INSC 72.
  • Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala; Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satish Chandra Sharma.
  • Judgment/Order date: 19-01-2026 (order dismissing SLPs).
  • Caselaws and citations: The order notes the High Court relied on “various decisions of this Court,” but no specific Supreme Court cases are cited by name in this text.
  • Statutes/laws referred:
    • Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Sections 7 and 7A.
    • Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 context for Section 17-A (quoted in full).
    • Jurisdictional discussion involving ACB (State) and CBI (Central), consent/approval under Section 17-A
Anil Daima v. State of Rajasthan 2026 INSC 72 - Prevention Of Corruption Act- Investigation By
Anil Daima v. State of Rajasthan 2026 INSC 72 - Prevention Of Corruption Act- Investigation By.pdf
75 KB
download-circle