BISWABHUSAN NAIK vs THE STATE OF ORISSA.

The Supreme Court held that under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, the sanction for prosecution does not need to be in any particular form or explicitly state the facts, as long as the facts can be proven otherwise. The Court clarified that the prosecution must only demonstrate that the accused possesses disproportionate assets as per Section 5(3), which creates a presumption of guilt unless disproven. The Court upheld the validity of the sanction and charge, emphasizing that the nature of the offence under Section 5(1)(a) does not require detailed particulars of individual acts of bribery.