In a first in nearly a decade, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) has sought sanction to prosecute an additional sessions judge of the Mumbai City Civil and Sessions Court, who was named as an accused in a corruption case last year.

The ACB sent its request for sanction to the Law and Judiciary Department in July. The department has since forwarded it to the Bombay High Court for a decision by the competent authority. A chargesheet in the case will be filed only after the sanction is received, a senior ACB officer said.

The judge, who is currently under suspension, was named in an FIR registered in November 2025 after the ACB arrested a clerk-cum-typist for allegedly accepting Rs 15 lakh from a complainant in return for a favourable order in a civil dispute. The ACB has alleged that the clerk had demanded and accepted the bribe on behalf of the judge.

Story continues below this ad

The move is significant as there has been no instance in the last decade of the ACB seeking prosecution sanction in a case involving a sessions judge, according to officials familiar with such cases. The Bombay High Court has, however, taken disciplinary action against judges named in corruption cases. Last year, it dismissed another additional sessions judge who had been named in a corruption case in Satara.

A senior ACB officer confirmed that sanction, mandatory under the Prevention of Corruption Act before a court can take cognisance of offences allegedly committed by a public servant, had been sought.

“In this case, forensic analysis of the conversation between the arrested accused and the judge was necessary to establish his role, as he was not arrested red-handed accepting the bribe. After a report from the State Forensic Science Laboratory confirmed the conversation and matched the voice sample, we decided to seek prosecution sanction from the concerned department,” the officer said.

“It is our procedure to collect concrete evidence before sending a request for prosecution sanction. As this case involved a member of the judiciary, we wanted to complete a thorough probe before seeking sanction,” the officer added.

Story continues below this ad

The judge was not arrested in the case. The clerk, Chandrakant Vasudev, was granted bail in December 2025. A departmental inquiry against the judge is yet to be initiated, an official said.

Under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, prior sanction is required before a court can take cognisance of an offence allegedly committed by a public servant in the discharge of official duties. The provision is intended to protect public servants from prosecution based on false or frivolous complaints. The law states that the competent authority should decide on a proposal for sanction within three months of receiving it.

The case

The ACB’s case dates back to September 2025, when the complainant, who was involved in a civil dispute over the alleged forcible possession of land belonging to his company, sent an associate to the civil court in Mazgaon for a hearing on September 9.

According to the ACB, the clerk allegedly asked the associate to meet him in the washroom and told him that if he “did something for sir”, an order would be passed in his favour. The clerk then gave the associate his phone number and asked him to pass it on to the complainant.

Story continues below this ad

The complainant subsequently contacted the clerk on WhatsApp and, according to the ACB, the two met at a cafe in Chembur on September 12. The clerk allegedly demanded Rs 25 lakh, saying Rs 10 lakh was for him and Rs 15 lakh for the judge. When the complainant refused, the clerk allegedly asked him to arrange a cab from Chembur to his home in Uran, which the complainant did.

The following day, according to the ACB, the clerk renegotiated the demand and settled on Rs 15 lakh as the “final amount”. When the complainant did not respond, the clerk allegedly called him again. The ACB’s remand plea states that on November 8, the clerk called the complainant’s associate on WhatsApp and told him that an order would be passed against them if the bribe was not paid. The complainant then approached the ACB, following which a trap was laid.

On November 11, the clerk was allegedly caught accepting Rs 15 lakh. The ACB subsequently alleged that a WhatsApp call was made from the clerk’s phone to the judge, during which the clerk informed him that the bribe amount had been received. According to the ACB, the judge acknowledged the receipt and told the clerk to bring the money to his home. The call was recorded in the presence of independent witnesses, the agency had claimed.

The ACB had also found several calls between the judge and the clerk after court hours, officials said. During interrogation, the clerk allegedly told the ACB that he had been posted as a clerk in the judge’s court for about a year and that they shared a cordial relationship. He allegedly said the judge frequently helped him with personal and domestic matters, and sought to explain the calls between them on that basis.

Story continues below this ad

During the investigation, the ACB obtained permission from the Bombay High Court to search the judge’s premises and conduct further investigation in accordance with law. The judge appeared before the ACB in December after being issued a notice. His voice sample was recorded for comparison with the purported Marathi conversation between him and the clerk, while his phone was also seized for further investigation.