MANOJ MISRA, J. B. PARDIWALA
Om Prakash Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Niranjan Kumar Upadhyay – Respondent
JUDGMENT
J.B. PARDIWALA, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals arise out of the common Judgment and Order passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 19.04.2018 in Criminal Misc. Writ Application Nos. 4080 of 2009 and 32494 of 2009 respectively filed by the respondent nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5 respectively under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the “CrPC”) whereby the High Court allowed the applications and quashed the proceedings of Case No. 67 of 2008 (State vs. Niranjan Kumar Upadhyay) as well as Case No. 67-A of 2009 (State vs. Ram Prakash Gunkar and others) pending before the CJM, Firozabad, both arising out of Case Crime No. 617 of 2007 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 201 and 120-B respectively of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, the “IPC”) with the Dakshin Police Station, District Firozabad, Uttar Pradesh.
A. FACTUAL MATRIX
3. On 12.10.2007, at 09:15 am, Om Prakash Yadav (hereinafter, the “appellant”) lodged a First Information Report (hereinafter, “FIR”) as Case Crime No. 617 of 2007 for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 307 of IPC respe
Dr. Hori Ram Singh v. The Crown reported in AIR 1939 FC 43 [Para 42] – Relied.
Gill and Another v. The King reported in AIR 1948 PC 128 [Para 45] – Relied.
Albert West Meads v. The King reported in AIR 1948 PC 156 [Para 46] – Relied.
Shreekantiah Ramayya Munipalli v. State of Bombay reported in (1954) 2 SCC 992 [Para 47] – Relied.
Amrik Singh v. State of Pepsu reported in AIR 1955 SC 309 [Para 48] – Relied.
Matajog Dobey v. H.C. Bhari reported in AIR 1956 SC 44 [Para 49] – Relied.
Dhannjay Ram Sharma v. M.S. Uppadaya and Others reported in AIR 1960 SC 745 [Para 50] – Relied.
P. Arulswami v. State reported in (1967) 1 SCR 201 [Para 51] – Relied.
Harihar Prasad Etc. v. State of Bihar reported in (1972) 3 SCC 89 [Para 52] – Relied.
B. Saha and Others v. M.S. Kochar reported in (1979) 4 SCC 177 [Para 53] – Relied.
State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Budhikota Subbarao reported in (1993) 3 SCC 339 [Para 54] – Relied.
Shambhoo Nath Misra v. State of U.P. and Others reported in (1997) 5 SCC 326 [Para 56] – Relied.
State of Orissa and Others v. Ganesh Chandra Jew reported in (2004) 8 SCC 40 [Para 57] – Relied.
S.K. Zutshi and Another v. Bimal Debnath and Another reported in (2004) 8 SCC 31 [Para 57] – Relied.
K. Kalimuthu v. State reported in (2005) 4 SCC 512 [Para 57] – Relied.
Sankaran Moitra v. Sadhna Das and Another reported in (2006) 4 SCC 584 [Para 59] – Relied.
Urmila Devi v. Yudhvir Singh reported in (2013) 15 SCC 624 [Para 61] – Relied.
Rajib Ranjan v. R. Vijaykumar reported in (2015) 1 SCC 513 [Para 62] – Relied.
Pukhraj v. State of Rajasthan and Another reported in (1973) 2 SCC 701 [Para 69] – Relied.
State of Bihar v. Kamla Prasad Singh and Others reported in (1998) 5 SCC 690 [Para 70] – Relied.
Bakhshish Singh Brar v. Gurmej Kaur and Another reported in (1987) 4 SCC 663 [Para 71] – Relied.
P.K. Pradhan v. State of Sikkim reported in (2001) 6 SCC 704 [Para 72] – Relied.
Devinder Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2016) 12 SCC 87 [Para 73] – Relied.
Parvat Singh and Others v. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2020) 4 SCC 33 [Para 77] – Relied.
Birbal Nath v. State of Rajasthan reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1396 [Para 78] – Relied.
(1) Sanction for prosecution of public servant – The provision must not be abused by public servants to camouflage commission of a crime under supposed colour of public office – While deciding issue ....
Point of Law : Alleged indulgence of the officers in cheating, fabrication of records or misappropriation cannot be said to be in discharge of their official duty - Their official duty is not to fabr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for a reasonable nexus between the alleged act and the discharge of official duty, and the limitations of the protection under Section 197....
Cognizance of offences against public servants requires prior government sanction under Sections 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and 197 of the Cr.P.C., even if the acts are alleged to be done....
Protection under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. applies to public servants for acts done in discharge of official duties, barring prosecution without prior sanction.
Sanction for prosecution of public servant – Section 197 Cr.P.C. does not extend its protective cover to every act or omission of a public servant while in service – It is restricted to only those ac....
The court emphasized that the requirement for sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. is a matter to be determined at trial, and inherent powers under Section 482 cannot quash proceedings based solely ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.