1.Supreme Court Split on PCA Section 17A (Prevention of Corruption Act)
What & Where
Prevention of Corruption Act 1988: chief anti-graft statute for all Indian public servants.
Section 17A: mandates prior government nod before any inquiry/investigation into official acts.
January 2026: Supreme Court two-judge bench split on Section 17A’s constitutionality.
Quick Facts for MCQs
Legal & Policy
- Coverage; includes officers, judges, anyone with public duty.
- Approval; presently from “concerned govt” until larger bench decides.
- Critique; termed “old wine” resembling earlier quashed directives.
Judicial Opinions
- Viswanathan; independent watchdog opinion to bind govt before consent.
- Nagarathna; Section 19 already enough, extra filter arbitrary.
- Split; Chief Justice to constitute larger bench for final call.
Precedents
- Vineet Narain 1998; Single Directive void for Article 14 breach.
- Swamy v CBI 2014; Section 6A DSPE Act struck for irrational shield.
- Both cases strengthen free, unbiased investigation principle.
Systemic Reforms
- Need; swift trial disposal for deterrence.
- Proposal; penalties on false/malicious complaints.
Key Data Points
| Feature | Data-Point |
|---|---|
| Parent law | Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 |
| Contested clause | Section 17A |
| Inserted by | 2018 Amendment |
| Approval stage | Pre-inquiry / investigation |
| Separate safeguard | Section 19 sanction at prosecution |
| Viswanathan stance | Uphold; Lokpal/Lokayukta must vet |
| Nagarathna stance | Strike; violates Article 14 |
| Core objective | Protect honest officials, curb “play-safe” syndrome |
| Impacted agencies | CBI, State Police |
| SC date | 30 Jan 2026 (split verdict) |
Related UPSC Prelims PYQs
With reference to the Constitution of India, prohibitions or limitations or provisions contained in ordinary laws cannot act as prohibitions or limitations on the constitutional powers under Article 142. It could mean which one of the following?






