L.D. HEALY vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

The Supreme Court held that the Deputy Chief Commercial Superintendent lacked the authority to sanction the prosecution of the appellant under Section 6(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, as he could not remove the appellant from service under the Indian Railway Establishment Code. The Court ruled that the quashing of the initial proceedings did not amount to an acquittal, allowing for a retrial after obtaining valid sanction from the Chief Commercial Superintendent. Additionally, the Court found that the recording of evidence by a successor judge after the death of the original judge did not vitiate the trial, as it was a mere irregularity under Section 537 of the Criminal Procedure Code.