Bombay High Court rules single-judge can hear Rana Kapoor plea challenging Section 17A PCA sanction

The Bombay High Court on Thursday held that the plea by Yes Bank founder Rana Kapoor alleging that the sanction obtained by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to prosecute him under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) was done in an improper manner, can be heard by a single-judge..Justice SK Shinde had during earlier hearings in the case enquired whether the plea, which implies that the entire proceeding against Kapoor is to be quashed, ought to be heard by a Division Bench.The judge had then heard the parties on the aspect of maintainability of the plea before reserving his verdict on that aspect on Tuesday, December 21.In his judgment today, Justice Shinde ruled that the plea can be heard by a single-judge.Kapoor filed the present petition claiming non-compliance by the CBI with the mandate under Section 17A of the PCA to obtain prior approval.In his plea, Kapoor raised grievance that the Special CBI Court had rejected his application seeking directions to the CBI to not proceed with the matter.He prayed for a consequent declaration that the investigation against Kapoor, including his custody is illegal and void..In the plea filed through advocate Rahul Agarwal, Kapoor claimed that he was a public servant as per the Section 46A of the Banking Regulation Act and hence, his alleged acts came under the ambit of the PCA.As per statutory requirements, a prior sanction was mandatory in the instant matter in order to investigate against a public servant, it was submitted. However the sanction was obtained subsequently and this is bad in law, the plea contended.CBI opposed the plea stating that the sanction had been properly obtained. .Advocate Hiten Venegaokar, appearing for the CBI, submitted that the prayers in the plea indirectly amounted to a quashing of the FIR and the complaint against him, which should ideally be heard by a Division Bench.However, advocate Vijay Aggarwal, appearing for Kapoor objected, stating that what he was challenging was a judicial order of the issuance of process on a chargesheet.He further pointed out that assuming the plea is allowed, the entire proceeding against him will not end, as the proceedings under the Indian Penal Code will continue.