UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Governor clears prosecution of ex-Minister in Messi case

Q1. With reference to the safeguards for public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended in 2018, consider the following statements: Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. The requirement of prior approval under Section 17A operates before any enquiry or investigation begins, whereas the requirement of previous sanction under Section 19 operates before a court takes cognizance.
  2. Previous sanction under Section 19 must be obtained before the police can register a case against the public servant.
  3. Prior approval under Section 17A is not needed where a public servant is arrested on the spot on a charge of accepting or attempting to accept an undue advantage.
  • A. 1 and 3 only
  • B. 2 and 3 only
  • C. 1, 2 and 3
  • D. 1 only

Q2. Consider the following statements: Which of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

  1. Approval granted under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to investigate a public servant's official decision does not by itself remove the need for previous sanction under Section 19 before a court takes cognizance.
  2. Previous sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is required only for offences that relate to a recommendation made or a decision taken by the public servant in official functions.
  • A. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
  • B. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
  • C. Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect
  • D. Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct

Q3. With reference to the relationship between the Governor and the Council of Ministers of a State, consider the following statements: Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. Under Article 164(1), the Chief Minister and the other Ministers are all appointed by the Governor on the advice of the Chief Minister, and hold office during the pleasure of the Governor.
  2. If a question arises whether a matter is one in which the Governor is required to act in his discretion, the decision of the Governor in his discretion is final.
  3. The question whether any, and if so what, advice was tendered by Ministers to the Governor cannot be inquired into in any court.
  • A. 1 only
  • B. 1, 2 and 3
  • C. 2 only
  • D. 2 and 3 only

Q4. X served as a Minister in a State and now holds no public office. X is accused of offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for decisions taken while a Minister. With reference to the requirement of sanction for X's prosecution, consider the following statements: Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. Because X no longer holds any public office, a court can take cognizance of the offence without any previous sanction.
  2. The sanction is to be given by the authority that would have been competent to remove X from office when the offence was allegedly committed.
  3. The requirement of sanction for a person who has ceased to be a public servant has been part of the Act since it was first enacted in 1988.
  • A. 2 and 3 only
  • B. 1 only
  • C. 2 only
  • D. 1 and 3 only

Q5. Consider the following statements: Which of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

  1. Following the 2018 amendment to the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, a private person who gives a bribe to a public servant can be prosecuted as an offender under the Act.
  2. The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 requires previous sanction from the competent authority before a court takes cognizance of specified offences alleged against a public servant.
  • A. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I
  • B. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I
  • C. Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect
  • D. Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct

Q6. Consider the following facts from a 2026 case: A State Government, acting on legal advice that the alleged acts were done in a ministerial capacity, requested the Governor to sanction the prosecution of a former Minister under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Governor granted the sanction. An investigation team had recommended cases against five accused, including the former Minister, his former private secretary, a private company and its owner. Which of the following inferences can validly be drawn?

  1. In granting the sanction, the Governor did not have to depart from the advice of the State's Council of Ministers.
  2. The private company and its owner can be tried only after the Governor separately sanctions their prosecution under Section 19.
  3. Because the request came from the Chief Minister, the Chief Minister is the competent authority to sanction the prosecution of a Minister.
  • A. 1 and 3 only
  • B. 1 only
  • C. 2 only
  • D. 2 and 3 only

Q7. Consider the following assertion: The competent authority to grant sanction for prosecuting a State Minister under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is the Governor. Which of the following statements support the above assertion?

  1. Ministers of a State hold office during the pleasure of the Governor.
  2. Section 19 of the PC Act vests the power of sanction, for persons not covered by the Union or State employment clauses, in the authority competent to remove that person from office.
  3. The Council of Ministers of a State is collectively responsible to the Legislative Assembly.
  • A. 2 and 3 only
  • B. 1 only
  • C. 1 and 2 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3