On January 13, 2026, the Supreme Court gave a split verdict on Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. This section requires prior approval before prosecuting public servants for official actions. Justice B.V. Nagarathna said that Section 17A was plainly unconstitutional. She argued it tried to block prosecution of corrupt officials rather than protect honest ones. She said, "Persons with integrity did not require any protection through the requirement of prior sanction under Section 17A." Meanwhile, Justice K.V. Viswanathan said the sanction should come from an independent body like the Lok Pal or Lok Ayukta. He warned striking down the provision completely would be "akin to throwing the baby out with the bathwater." Section 17A was added in a 2018 amendment. It stops any investigation against public servants for their official recommendations without prior approval from a competent authority. The case came from a petition by the NGO Centre for Public Interest Litigation, represented by advocate Prashant Bhushan. Mr. Bhushan argued that this law cripples anti-corruption efforts. He said governments rarely give approval for investigations against officials, making the government a judge in its own case. He noted, "Only about 40% of cases involving the CBI got prior approval under Section 17A for investigation." Justice Viswanathan raised concerns on frivolous prosecutions and said, "There are officers who give their life and soul to the country. How do we ensure that they do not become prey to frivolous prosecution for their official actions or recommendations made in the line of duty?" Representing the Union government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati defended Section 17A. They cautioned that without this protection, anyone with a grudge could misuse NGOs to file cases against public servants. When questioned about favouritism in government approvals, Mr. Mehta admitted it was true across all governance branches. The Supreme Court's debate highlights the challenge of balancing protection for honest officials and ensuring accountability in public service.