Can the invalid state governor sanction and lack of corroborating evidence be overturned in a criminal appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court?

Sources
Source Judgment: Read judgment
Case Analysis: Read case analysis

Suppose a senior administrative officer, whose permanent posting is with a state civil service, is temporarily assigned to a central ministry for a major infrastructure project and during that assignment is alleged to have accepted illicit gratification in exchange for facilitating the issuance of permits under a regulatory scheme.

The investigating agency files an FIR naming the officer as the accused, charging him with conspiracy, bribery and forgery under the Indian Penal Code. Because the alleged offences were committed while the officer was serving the central government, the prosecution seeks a sanction under the provision that requires the Governor‑General’s personal judgment for public servants employed in the affairs of the Union. The sanction is issued by the State Governor instead, on the ground that the officer remains a state employee.

At trial before the Additional District and Sessions Court, the prosecution relies heavily on the testimony of two junior clerks who claim the officer directed them to falsify application forms. No documentary evidence corroborates the clerks’ statements. The trial court, accepting the sanction as valid, convicts the officer and imposes rigorous imprisonment and a fine.

The officer files an appeal, arguing that the trial court lacked jurisdiction because the sanction was issued by the wrong authority. He contends that the loan‑ed nature of his service places him within the “affairs of the Union,” making the Governor‑General’s sanction mandatory. Moreover, he points out that the conviction rests solely on uncorroborated accomplice testimony, which is insufficient to sustain a finding of guilt.

While the officer’s factual defence—that he did not personally receive any money—addresses the substantive allegations, it does not resolve the procedural defect concerning the sanction. The appellate court must first determine whether the trial proceeded on a valid statutory basis. If the sanction is found defective, the conviction cannot stand, regardless of the evidential issues.

Consequently, the appropriate procedural route is a criminal appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court under the provisions that allow an appeal against conviction and sentence. The appeal seeks to set aside the conviction on the ground of an invalid sanction and to quash the proceedings on the basis of insufficient corroboration of the accomplice testimony.

To pursue this remedy, the officer engages a lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court who drafts a comprehensive petition highlighting the statutory infirmities. The counsel emphasizes that the sanction must be issued by the authority empowered under the relevant provision, and that the trial court’s reliance on a sanction from the State Governor renders the entire proceeding void.

During the hearing, the lawyers in Punjab and Haryana High Court argue that the trial court’s jurisdiction was compromised the moment the sanction was issued by the wrong authority. They cite precedent that an invalid sanction defeats the prosecution’s case, irrespective of the merits of the evidence. The bench is also reminded that the testimony of the two clerks, without any independent documentary corroboration, fails the legal requirement for sustaining a conviction based on accomplice statements.

The High Court, after examining the statutory scheme, concludes that the officer’s loan‑ed status indeed places him within the ambit of the Union’s affairs, thereby obligating the Governor‑General to grant the sanction. The sanction obtained from the State Governor is therefore ultra vires and cannot legitimize the prosecution.

In addition, the court notes that the prosecution’s case is built on a fragile evidentiary foundation. The lack of any independent proof of the alleged falsified permits means the conviction cannot survive the stringent test of corroboration required for accomplice testimony.

Accordingly, the Punjab and Haryana High Court sets aside the conviction, declares the proceedings null and void, and orders the release of the officer from custody. The court also directs the investigating agency to close the case, as the procedural defect precludes any further prosecution on the same facts.

The officer’s successful appeal illustrates why a mere factual defence was insufficient at the trial stage. The core issue lay in the procedural legitimacy of the sanction and the evidentiary weakness, both of which could only be addressed through a higher‑court criminal appeal.

Legal practitioners often advise that, in similar circumstances, a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court would assess the jurisdictional nuances before filing a petition for quashing under Article 226 of the Constitution, while lawyers in Chandigarh High Court might alternatively pursue a revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure if the appeal route is exhausted.

In this scenario, the strategic choice of filing a criminal appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court proved decisive, allowing the accused to obtain relief that could not have been achieved through a simple defence at trial.

Question: Does the sanction issued by the State Governor satisfy the statutory requirement that the sanction for prosecuting a public servant engaged in Union affairs must be granted by the Governor‑General?

Answer: The factual matrix shows that the accused senior administrative officer was a permanent state civil servant temporarily assigned to a central ministry for a major infrastructure project. While on loan, he allegedly accepted illicit gratification to facilitate permits. The investigating agency filed an FIR and sought sanction under the provision that mandates the Governor‑General’s personal judgment when the alleged offences are committed in the affairs of the Union. The prosecution, however, obtained the sanction from the State Governor, arguing that the officer remained a state employee. The legal problem therefore hinges on the interpretation of “affairs of the Union” and the identity of the competent sanctioning authority. If the officer’s loaned status places him within the Union’s jurisdiction, the sanction from the State Governor is ultra vires and renders the prosecution statutorily infirm. Procedurally, an invalid sanction defeats the trial court’s jurisdiction, obliging the appellate court to set aside any conviction irrespective of the evidential record. For the accused, this means that the conviction cannot stand and he is entitled to release from custody. For the complainant and the prosecution, the defect nullifies their case, compelling the investigating agency to close the FIR. A lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court would emphasize that the statutory scheme expressly reserves the sanctioning power for the Governor‑General in such circumstances, and that any deviation invalidates the proceedings. Consequently, the High Court must scrutinise the nature of the officer’s service, and if it finds the loaned assignment to be within Union affairs, it will declare the sanction defective, vacate the conviction, and order the dismissal of the case.

Question: How does the reliance on uncorroborated accomplice testimony affect the validity of the conviction under the evidentiary standards applicable in criminal trials?

Answer: At trial, the prosecution’s case rested solely on the statements of two junior clerks who claimed the officer directed them to falsify application forms. No documentary evidence corroborated their testimony. Under criminal law, an accomplice’s testimony must be supported by independent evidence to satisfy the corroboration requirement, ensuring that convictions are not based on unverified allegations. The legal issue, therefore, is whether the trial court erred in convicting the officer without such corroboration. Procedurally, a conviction founded on uncorroborated accomplice evidence is vulnerable to reversal on appeal, as the appellate court must assess whether the evidentiary threshold was met. For the accused, the lack of corroboration strengthens his claim for quashing the conviction and securing bail or release. For the complainant, it undermines the prosecution’s ability to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, potentially leading to dismissal of charges. A lawyer in Chandigarh High Court would argue that the evidentiary rule mandates corroboration and that the trial court’s failure to apply this principle constitutes a miscarriage of justice. The practical implication is that the High Court, upon reviewing the record, is likely to set aside the conviction, order the expungement of the criminal record, and direct the investigating agency to close the case. This outcome also serves as a cautionary precedent for future prosecutions, emphasizing the necessity of independent corroborative material when relying on accomplice testimony.

Question: What procedural remedy is available to the accused to challenge both the defective sanction and the evidentiary insufficiency, and why is a criminal appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court the appropriate forum?

Answer: The accused has been convicted by the Additional District and Sessions Court and faces imprisonment. The procedural defects identified—an invalid sanction and uncorroborated evidence—provide grounds for a criminal appeal. Under the criminal procedural framework, an appeal against conviction and sentence is the statutory remedy for aggrieved parties, allowing higher courts to examine jurisdictional and evidentiary issues. The Punjab and Haryana High Court possesses appellate jurisdiction over convictions rendered by subordinate courts within its territorial jurisdiction. By filing an appeal, the accused can raise the invalid sanction as a jurisdictional defect that vitiates the trial’s legal foundation, and simultaneously contest the evidentiary basis of the conviction. The practical effect of a successful appeal would be the setting aside of the conviction, release from custody, and termination of the criminal proceeding. For the prosecution, the appeal forces a re‑evaluation of the sanction’s validity and the strength of the evidence, potentially leading to dismissal. A lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court would prepare a comprehensive petition highlighting both statutory infirmities and the failure to meet the corroboration standard, thereby maximizing the chance of relief. The High Court’s authority to quash convictions on jurisdictional grounds ensures that the procedural defect cannot be ignored, while its power to assess evidentiary sufficiency safeguards the accused’s right to a fair trial. Consequently, the criminal appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court is the correct and effective avenue to obtain the relief sought.

Question: If the High Court declares the sanction ultra vires and the conviction void, what are the subsequent legal consequences for the investigating agency and the status of the FIR?

Answer: A declaration that the sanction is ultra vires renders the entire prosecution void ab initio. The legal consequence is that the proceedings are deemed never to have lawfully commenced, obligating the court to order the dismissal of the case and the release of the accused from any remaining custody. The investigating agency, having filed the FIR, must close the investigation as the statutory prerequisite for prosecution—valid sanction—cannot be satisfied retroactively. Practically, this means the agency must file a closure report, and the FIR will be marked as closed without further action. For the complainant, the closure signifies that no further legal remedy is available in the present matter, though a fresh investigation could be contemplated only if a new, valid sanction were obtained for distinct conduct. A lawyer in Chandigarh High Court would advise that the agency’s continued pursuit of the case would amount to an abuse of process, exposing it to contempt proceedings. The High Court may also direct the agency to expunge the case from its records, ensuring that the accused’s name is cleared and that no collateral consequences, such as employment repercussions, persist. This outcome reinforces the principle that procedural safeguards, like proper sanction, are indispensable to the legitimacy of criminal prosecutions.

Question: How does the High Court’s ruling on the sanction and evidentiary issues influence future prosecutions of loaned civil servants, and what preventive measures should administrative bodies adopt?

Answer: The High Court’s decision establishes a binding precedent that loaned civil servants engaged in Union affairs fall within the ambit of the sanctioning authority of the Governor‑General. This clarification compels prosecuting authorities to obtain the correct sanction before initiating proceedings, thereby averting jurisdictional challenges. Moreover, the ruling underscores the necessity of corroborating accomplice testimony with independent evidence, reinforcing evidentiary standards for future cases. For administrative bodies, the practical implication is the need to institute robust internal controls and documentation mechanisms when loaning officers to central ministries, ensuring that any alleged misconduct is recorded and can be substantiated with tangible proof. A lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court would counsel that ministries and state departments should maintain clear records of assignments, delineate the authority hierarchy, and seek pre‑emptive legal opinions on sanction requirements. Additionally, training programs for officers on ethical conduct and the legal ramifications of corruption can mitigate the risk of illicit behavior. By adopting these preventive measures, administrative agencies can reduce the likelihood of prosecutions being derailed on procedural grounds and promote accountability while safeguarding the rights of public servants.

Question: Why does the criminal appeal against the conviction and sentence have to be filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court rather than any other forum?

Answer: The factual matrix shows that the accused was a senior administrative officer of a state civil service who was temporarily assigned to a central ministry. The alleged offences were committed while he was acting in the capacity of a Union servant, which brings the matter within the jurisdiction of the High Court that has territorial jurisdiction over both the state and the Union functions performed in that region. Under the constitutional scheme, the Punjab and Haryana High Court exercises original jurisdiction over criminal matters arising in the states of Punjab, Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh, and it also possesses appellate jurisdiction over convictions rendered by the Additional District and Sessions Court situated within its territorial ambit. Because the trial court that convicted the officer is located in a district that falls under the jurisdiction of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the statutory provision granting a right of appeal against conviction and sentence mandates that the appeal be presented before that High Court. Moreover, the procedural remedy of quashing the conviction on the ground of an invalid sanction is a specific relief that can only be entertained by the High Court exercising its power of revision and appellate jurisdiction, not by a subordinate court. The accused therefore engages a lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court who is familiar with the appellate rules, the precedent on sanction validity, and the evidentiary standards for accomplice testimony. This counsel prepares a comprehensive appeal that challenges the jurisdictional defect of the sanction and the insufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence. By filing the appeal in the correct High Court, the accused ensures that the appellate court has the authority to set aside the conviction, to declare the proceedings void, and to order his release from custody, which would not be possible in any other forum. The strategic choice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court thus aligns with the territorial and hierarchical requirements of criminal procedure and maximises the chance of obtaining effective relief.

Question: In what circumstances would the accused consider retaining a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court, and how does that choice affect the procedural options available?

Answer: The accused may turn to a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court when he wishes to explore remedies that are not limited to the ordinary appellate route but involve constitutional or extraordinary jurisdictional powers. For instance, if the accused believes that the sanction defect and the trial court’s reliance on uncorroborated accomplice testimony constitute a violation of his fundamental right to a fair trial, he may file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in the High Court that has jurisdiction over Chandigarh. The Chandigarh High Court, being a seat of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, can entertain writ applications for quashing criminal proceedings, for granting bail, or for issuing a direction to the investigating agency to close the case. Engaging a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court is prudent because such counsel will be adept at drafting writ petitions, citing relevant constitutional jurisprudence, and navigating the procedural requisites for interim relief. The choice of this forum expands the procedural toolbox beyond the standard appeal; it allows the accused to seek immediate relief such as release from custody pending the determination of the appeal, or to compel the prosecution to withdraw the case on the ground of a defective sanction. Moreover, a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court can advise whether a revision petition under the Code of Criminal Procedure is appropriate after the appeal is decided, thereby ensuring that the accused does not miss any subsequent procedural avenue. This strategic engagement is especially valuable when the accused is in pre‑trial detention and needs swift judicial intervention. By filing a writ, the accused can potentially secure a stay on the execution of the sentence, preserve his liberty, and create a procedural environment that forces the prosecution to confront the jurisdictional infirmities before proceeding further. Thus, the decision to retain a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court is driven by the desire to leverage constitutional remedies that complement the criminal appeal and to obtain timely relief that the ordinary appellate process may not provide.

Question: How does the procedural route from the filing of the FIR to the present appeal illustrate the necessity of challenging the sanction before the High Court?

Answer: The procedural chronology begins with the registration of an FIR that named the officer as the accused for conspiracy, bribery and forgery. Because the alleged conduct occurred while the officer was on loan to a Union ministry, the prosecution was required to obtain prior sanction from the authority empowered under the relevant statutory scheme. The investigating agency, however, secured a sanction from the State Governor, interpreting the officer’s permanent posting as the basis for jurisdiction. This procedural defect is pivotal because the law mandates that a sanction issued by an unauthorized authority renders the entire prosecution ultra vires. When the trial court accepted the State Governor’s sanction and proceeded to convict, it inadvertently affirmed a jurisdictionally infirm foundation. The accused’s appeal therefore must focus on the invalidity of the sanction, as the appellate court’s power to set aside a conviction is predicated on the existence of a procedural flaw that vitiates the trial’s legality. By engaging lawyers in Punjab and Haryana High Court, the accused can raise the sanction issue as a ground of appeal, supported by case law that an improper sanction defeats the prosecution’s case irrespective of the evidential merits. The appeal also challenges the reliance on uncorroborated accomplice testimony, but the primary thrust is the jurisdictional defect. This approach is necessary because a factual defence that the accused did not receive money does not address the statutory requirement that the sanction be valid before any trial can lawfully commence. The High Court, exercising its appellate jurisdiction, can examine whether the sanction was issued by the correct authority, and if it finds the sanction defective, it can declare the proceedings null and void, thereby achieving a comprehensive remedy that a factual defence alone could not secure. Consequently, the procedural route underscores that the remedy lies in the High Court’s power to quash the conviction on jurisdictional grounds, making the challenge to the sanction indispensable.

Question: Why is a purely factual defence insufficient at the trial stage, and how does the High Court remedy address the procedural shortcomings highlighted by the facts?

Answer: At the trial stage, the prosecution’s case rested on the testimony of two junior clerks who alleged that the accused directed them to falsify permit applications. No documentary evidence corroborated these statements, leaving the conviction vulnerable to the legal principle that uncorroborated accomplice testimony cannot sustain a finding of guilt. While the accused could assert a factual defence—that he never received any illicit gratification—such a defence does not confront the procedural infirmity that the sanction authorising the prosecution was issued by the State Governor rather than the authority empowered under the statutory scheme for offences committed in the affairs of the Union. The law requires that before any trial can commence, a valid sanction be obtained; without it, the trial is void ab initio. Therefore, even if the factual defence were successful, the conviction would still be unsustainable because the trial itself lacked a lawful foundation. The High Court remedy, accessed through an appeal filed by lawyers in Punjab and Haryana High Court, directly addresses this procedural defect. By reviewing the sanction’s validity, the High Court can declare the prosecution illegal, quash the conviction, and order the release of the accused from custody. Additionally, the High Court can examine the evidentiary weakness, reinforcing the conclusion that the conviction cannot stand. This dual focus on jurisdictional and evidentiary shortcomings provides a comprehensive relief that a factual defence alone cannot achieve. Moreover, the High Court’s power to issue a writ of certiorari or to grant bail through a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court ensures that the accused’s liberty is restored promptly, while also preventing the investigating agency from pursuing further prosecution on the same facts. In sum, the procedural shortcomings—invalid sanction and lack of corroboration—necessitate a High Court intervention, making the appeal the appropriate and effective remedy beyond a mere factual defence.

Question: How does the defect in the sanction‑granting authority affect the trial court’s jurisdiction, and what strategic steps should the accused’s counsel take to exploit this defect in the appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court?

Answer: The sanction is the gateway that authorises a public servant to be prosecuted; without a valid sanction the prosecution is statutorily barred. In the present facts the sanction was issued by the State Governor, yet the officer was on loan to the Union government and therefore fell within the “affairs of the Union.” This mis‑characterisation means the sanction does not satisfy the statutory requirement that the Governor‑General’s personal judgment be obtained. Because the trial court proceeded on the basis of an invalid sanction, its jurisdiction to entertain the case is vitiated ab initio. The strategic implication is that any judgment rendered, irrespective of the evidential record, is void and cannot be sustained on appeal. The accused’s counsel must therefore frame the appeal primarily as a jurisdictional challenge, emphasizing that the sanction is ultra vires and that the trial court was deprived of the essential statutory prerequisite. A well‑crafted prayer for quashing the conviction on this ground will compel the High Court to examine the statutory scheme, the nature of the officer’s loaned service, and the authority required for sanction. The counsel should also seek a declaration that the prosecution is barred from any further proceeding on the same facts, thereby precluding a retrial. In parallel, the appeal should request that the court stay the execution of the sentence and order the release of the accused from custody, citing the fundamental defect. The lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court must marshal the statutory language, precedents on sanction validity, and the factual matrix showing the officer’s Union‑level duties to demonstrate that the sanction was issued by the wrong authority. By anchoring the appeal on this jurisdictional flaw, the counsel maximises the chance of a complete reversal, rendering any evidential disputes moot and securing immediate relief for the accused.

Question: Given that the prosecution’s case rests solely on the testimony of two junior clerks without any independent documentary corroboration, what evidentiary challenges does this pose, and how can lawyers in Punjab and Haryana High Court effectively argue for the insufficiency of the accomplice evidence?

Answer: Accomplice testimony is admissible only when it is supported by independent evidence that confirms the core elements of the alleged offence. In the present scenario the two clerks allege that the officer directed them to falsify permit applications, yet no permit registers, application forms, or internal communications have been produced to substantiate those claims. The absence of any documentary trail means the testimony stands alone, which under established criminal jurisprudence is insufficient to sustain a conviction. The strategic approach for the defence is to file a detailed memorandum highlighting the legal principle that uncorroborated accomplice statements cannot form the sole basis of a finding of guilt. The counsel should request that the High Court scrutinise the trial record for any attempt by the prosecution to link the clerks’ statements to objective facts, such as timestamps, signatures, or audit trails, and point out the total lack thereof. Moreover, the defence can move for a direction that the prosecution produce the original permit files, the electronic logs of the regulatory portal, and any financial records showing the flow of money, none of which have been disclosed. By demonstrating that the prosecution failed to meet the corroboration threshold, the lawyers in Punjab and Haryana High Court can argue that the conviction is unsafe and must be set aside. The argument should also stress the prejudice to the accused, who faces a severe penalty based on speculative testimony, and invoke the principle that the benefit of doubt must be resolved in favour of the accused. If the court accepts that the evidential foundation is fundamentally weak, it will be compelled to quash the conviction on the ground of insufficient proof, irrespective of any procedural issues already identified.

Question: While the appeal is pending, what are the risks associated with continued custody, and how should a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court address bail or other relief to mitigate these risks?

Answer: Continued detention after a conviction, especially when the conviction is predicated on a procedural defect, exposes the accused to unnecessary hardship and may amount to an unlawful deprivation of liberty. The primary risk is that the accused remains incarcerated while the High Court deliberates, despite the strong argument that the sanction was invalid and the trial lacked jurisdiction. A lawyer in Chandigarh High Court should therefore move promptly for a bail application on the grounds of procedural infirmity, emphasizing that the conviction is vulnerable to being set aside and that the accused poses no flight risk or threat to the investigation. The counsel must submit a detailed affidavit outlining the factual background, the absence of any substantive evidence, and the pending jurisdictional challenge, thereby establishing that the continued custody is not justified. Additionally, the lawyer should request that the court stay the execution of the sentence pending the outcome of the appeal, invoking the principle that a higher court may stay an order that is likely to be reversed. The application should also highlight the impact of incarceration on the officer’s career, family, and reputation, reinforcing the equitable considerations that favour bail. If the court is persuaded, it may grant bail with conditions, such as surrender of passport and regular reporting, which would alleviate the custodial risk while preserving the integrity of the appellate process. By securing bail, the defence not only protects the accused’s personal liberty but also positions the appellant to actively participate in the appellate proceedings, gather further evidence, and respond to any procedural orders issued by the High Court.

Question: What specific documents and records should the defence seek from the regulatory authority and the investigating agency to undermine the prosecution’s case, and how can lawyers in Chandigarh High Court effectively compel their production?

Answer: The defence must target the evidentiary backbone of the prosecution, which is the alleged falsification of permit applications. Key documents include the original permit application forms, the electronic audit logs of the regulatory portal, internal memos authorising any alterations, and the financial ledgers showing receipt of any payments. Additionally, correspondence between the officer and the clerks, minutes of meetings, and any whistle‑blower complaints filed with the investigating agency are essential. The defence should file a formal application under the relevant provisions of the criminal procedure code seeking production of these documents, arguing that they are material to establishing the truth of the allegations and to testing the credibility of the accomplice testimony. Lawyers in Chandigarh High Court can argue that the investigating agency has a duty to disclose all material evidence, especially when the prosecution’s case hinges on uncorroborated statements. The counsel should also request a forensic examination of the electronic logs to determine whether any alterations were made and by whom, thereby potentially exposing the absence of any directive from the accused. If the agency resists, the defence can move for an order compelling production, citing the principle that the accused is entitled to a fair trial and that suppression of documents would prejudice the defence. The application should be supported by a detailed affidavit outlining the relevance of each document to the factual matrix, the lack of any such evidence in the trial record, and the necessity of these records to either corroborate or refute the prosecution’s narrative. Successful compulsion of these documents can either reveal a lack of any directive from the accused or expose inconsistencies that further weaken the prosecution’s case, thereby strengthening the appeal’s prospects.

Question: Considering the options of filing a criminal appeal, a revision, or a writ petition, what strategic considerations should guide the accused’s counsel in choosing the most effective remedy, and how might a lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court coordinate with the investigating agency to maximise the chance of relief?

Answer: The choice of remedy hinges on the nature of the defect and the stage of proceedings. A criminal appeal directly challenges the conviction and sentence, allowing the High Court to examine both the jurisdictional flaw in the sanction and the evidentiary insufficiency. A revision is appropriate when a lower court has acted beyond its jurisdiction, which aligns with the sanction defect, but it is limited to jurisdictional errors and does not permit a full re‑evaluation of the evidence. A writ petition under the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court can be used to challenge the legality of the sanction and the detention, but it is generally confined to extraordinary circumstances and may not address the evidential aspects. The strategic calculus therefore favours a criminal appeal as the primary route, because it permits a comprehensive review of both procedural and substantive issues, and it provides the opportunity to seek a stay of the sentence and bail. The lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court should also consider filing a concurrent revision to underscore the jurisdictional lapse, thereby reinforcing the argument that the trial court lacked authority from the outset. Coordination with the investigating agency is crucial; the counsel can request that the agency withdraw the prosecution on the basis of the invalid sanction, which, if accepted, would lead to a closure of the case and preclude any further legal battles. Even if the agency does not withdraw, the defence can use the agency’s own reports to demonstrate that the sanction was not obtained from the proper authority. By combining a criminal appeal with a strategic revision and engaging the investigating agency to acknowledge the procedural defect, the accused’s counsel maximises the likelihood of obtaining a comprehensive relief that includes quashing the conviction, release from custody, and an order that the case be closed permanently.