KOCHI: The Kerala High Court on Friday rejected the unconditional apology tendered by IAS officer K Biju, Secretary in charge of the Cashew Development Department, over the controversial prosecution sanction order in the alleged Cashew Corporation corruption case.
The court also cautioned that government officials should not become weapons of the government while discharging their statutory duties.
Justice A Badharudeen was considering the affidavit filed by Biju, who had earlier been directed to appear in person and explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him over the language used in the prosecution sanction order.
Although the officer expressed regret and tendered an unconditional apology, the court declined to accept it and directed him to submit a fresh affidavit.
The court also instructed Biju to issue a revised prosecution sanction order incorporating a clear statement that it had been passed "with proper application of mind."
The case has been posted for further consideration on July 15.
During the hearing, Justice Badharudeen observed that civil servants are expected to act independently while exercising statutory powers and should not become instruments of the government.
The court emphasised that an order granting sanction for prosecution must demonstrate that the competent authority has independently examined the materials and arrived at its decision.
In his affidavit, Biju admitted that the language employed in the original prosecution sanction order was inappropriate.
He expressed regret that the wording was capable of being perceived as reflecting adversely on the authority of the High Court and tendered an unconditional apology, stating that it was made voluntarily, unequivocally and with genuine remorse.
He further stated that he withdrew every expression in the order that could be construed as questioning the correctness, authority or judicial wisdom of the court.
The controversy stemmed from the prosecution sanction order issued by Biju, which gave the impression that the State Government had granted sanction only because it was directed to do so by the High Court and not after an independent application of mind.
The wording prompted sharp criticism from the court, which observed that such an order could undermine the statutory responsibility of the sanctioning authority.
Following the court's earlier observations, the government had issued a revised order and placed it before the High Court.
However, the court on Friday made it clear that the sanction order must unequivocally reflect that it was issued after due and independent application of mind before it could be accepted.
