A public servant cannot be prosecuted for acts committed in the discharge of their duties without prior sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

1. This is an application under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) for quashing the trial of the petitioner under Sections 504 and 323/109 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The incidents out of which the present application arises took place on 5-12-1976. On that date the petitioner, a member of the Indian Administrative Service was posted as Sub-Divisional Officer at Arrah. The incidents of 5-12-1976 led to filing of a complaint by Dadan Singh, opposite party against the petitioner and thirteen others. Arising out of the same incidents the police of Udwantnagar Police station also instituted case No. 3 (12) 76 on the basis of a written report of K. P. Sinha, Circle Officer, Udwantnagar against Rampukar Singh and Shree Narayan Singh. The complaint filed by the opposite party alleged commission of offences under Sections 147, 323, 500, 502 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. It was alleged in the complaint filed by the opposite party that with the object of instigating class war between backward classes and forward classes, the petitioner along with K. P. Sinha, Anchal Adhikari, Udwantnagar was getting the ripe paddy crop of plot No. 2176 forcibly harvested by accused 3 to 14. The complainant alleged that the paddy crop had been grown by him and there was no justification for the petitioner to have got the crop harvested by accused 3 to 14. On learning of the forcible harvesting of his crops by the accused, the complainant went to the field and protested to what was happening there, but the petitioner, it is alleged, used abusive language. The abusive language said to have been used by the petitioner was "sale Tumhare Bap Ka Khet Hai" and other expressions. This provoked the complainant, but he contained himself with great difficulty. The second allegation against the petitioner in the complaint was that the petitioner said "Maro Sale Ko." Upon this instigation accused No. 2 K. P. Sinha, Anchal Adhikari of Udwantnagar caught hold of the complainants shirt and gave him a fist blow. When Ram Pukar Singh and Shree Narayan Singh, witnesses to the incident, protested to the acts of the petitioner and the Anchal Adhikari, they were arrested by the Armed Forces on their order and taken to Arrah even though bailors were offered to secure their release. The complaint was filed on 7-12-1976 in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arrah, who immediately examined the complainant on solemn affirmation. Thereafter, he transfreed the case under Sec.192 (1) of the Code to Shri A. P. Sharma. Judicial Magistrate, Second Class for inquiry and disposal according to law. Shri Sharma, the transferee Judicial Magistrate, examined five witnesses in support of the complaint and being of the view that a prima facie case against the petitioner had been made out under Sections 504 and 323/109 of the Indian Penal Code directed issuance of processes against him. Shri Sharma, however, did not issue processes for abetment of the offence of theft of the paddy crops, as no sanction to prosecute him had been obtained for that offence. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate accepted the stand of the complainant opposite party that the acts of the petitioner could not be deemed to have been committed in his official capacity. The learned Magistrate directed issuance of processes under Sec.323 against the Anchal Adhikari and under Sec.379 of the Indian Penal Code against accused Nos. 3 to 14, who are Dusadhe by caste. That is one side of the picture as presented by the complainant opposite party in regard to the incidents in village Udwantnagar on 5-12-1976.

3. The other side of the picture has been presented before this Court by the petitioner. That is contained in the petition and supplementary affidavits filed by him. The counter version is that there was an explosive situation in village Udwantnagar where the land in question was situate. The dispute between the complainant and the Dusadh accused in rel