SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(SC) 386

A.P.SEN, B.C.RAY
Balbir Singh: Delhi Administration – Appellant
Versus
D. N. Kadian, M. M. Delhi: D. N. Kadian – Respondent


Advocates:
ANIL GUPTA, M.K.BANERJI, P.K.MUKHERJI, R.N.Poddar

JUDGMENT

B.C. RAY, J. :— The only question involved in these two appeals is whether the criminal proceedings initiated against the appellants, i.e. Balbir Singh, Sub-Inspector and Ram Shankar, Constable of Delhi Police Force is maintainable in the absence of any prior sanction obtained from the Lt. Governor as required under S. 197(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. Section 197(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure envisages that no court can take cognizance of any offence alleged to have been committed by a Judge or Magistrate or a public servant while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty without previous sanction of the Government. Sub-sec. (2) of that Section further provides that no court shall take cognizance of any offence alleged to have been committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Union while acting or purporting to act in discharge of his official duty, without obtaining the prior sanction of the Central Government. Sub-section (3) of the said Section further provides that the State Government may by notification direct that the provisions of Sub-section (2) shall apply, to such class or category of members of the Forces charged













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top