Hyderabad: Telangana high court has dismissed a petition by a retired railway engineer seeking to quash money laundering charges, holding that the absence of “prior sanction” did not invalidate the case as the alleged acts had no reasonable connection with official duties.A bench of Justice N Tukaramji said the law provided safeguards to protect public servants from frivolous or harassing litigation, but the protection was not absolute. The court said statutory protection applied only when there was a “reasonable nexus” between the alleged criminal act and the performance of official functions.The matter related to a CBI case in 2010 in which the petitioner was caught red-handed while receiving 10,000 alleged bribe, followed by a finding that he acquired disproportionate assets. He was initially convicted by the trial court, but high court set aside the conviction. An appeal against the order was pending before Supreme Court.Meanwhile, Enforcement Directorate had initiated a probe against the petitioner under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, and the matter was pending trial. High court passed the orders while hearing the petitioner challenging ED proceedings against him. The petitioner was represented by V Seetharama Avadhani, and Dominic Fernandes, senior standing counsel appeared for Directorate of Enforcement.Referring to established legal principles, the judge said that if an official position merely provided an opportunity to commit an offence, the accused could not claim legal immunity. The bench said certain acts, by their nature, fell outside professional responsibilities, including misappropriating funds, fabricating official records, or accepting bribes.In the present case, the court noted that the allegations involved acceptance of a bribe, possession of disproportionate assets, and laundering of those funds, and ruled that these were prima facie criminal acts. It held that holding public office did not grant blanket statutory protection for conduct fundamentally unconnected to official duties.The court said whether an act formed part of official duty was a matter of evidence to be examined during trial, but at the preliminary stage the petitioner’s plea was untenable as the alleged crimes bore no reasonable connection to his official functions. The court dismissed the petition as premature, allowing the money laundering proceedings to continue.
