A public servant is entitled to the protection of Section 197 of the CrPC only when the act constituting an offense is directly or reasonably connected with the official duties.

Nagendra Rai, J.

1. Both the matters arise out of the complaint case No.260/92 and as such they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 20-9-96 passed in complaint Case No.260/92 by the Judicial magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi issuing process after holding that a prima facie case is made out against them under Sections 147, 148, 342, 427, 506, 380 and 384 I. P. C.

3. On 9-9-92 opposite party No.2, posted at the relevant time as DIG/executive director (Vigilance) Central Coal field Limited (hereinafter referred to as the coal field) filed a petition of complaint against the petitioners of both the cases alleging inter alia that while posted in the aforesaid capacity in the Coal Field he has exposed the illegal and nefarious activities of the Officers of the Coal Field as a result of which he incurred their displeasure and they in connivance with the accused petitioners, who are Superintendent of police, xxxx - Deputy Superintendent of police and Inspectors of C. B. I. /sp. at ranchi, hatched up a conspiracy to dislodge him from the post of D. I. G. Vigilance B. C. C. L. Ltd. , so that there may be no impediment in their nefarious activities. On 30th August, 1992 at 8.30 p. m. he alongwith Dr. Narendra Sinha came to his house and found that the accused persons after having trespassed into his premises were sitting infront of his Verandah. Seeing him they told that he could not enter into his house and they confined and restrained him from moving without any search warrant or authority paper. They took the com-plainant inside the house and confined him and forced him to hand over the key and his mother and two children were also confined in a room. The accused petitioners ransacked the house and persistently asked the complainant to disclose as to where he has kept cash and other valuables and also the confidential papers, notings, manuscripts and taperecorder used in Vigilance work by him.

4. It is alleged by the complainant that the accused petitioners removed the confidential papers, notings, cassettes which contained valuable evidence against the Officers of the Coal Field and against whom he submitted reports after having found the prima facie charges of corruption. The ransack continued from 8.30 p. m. of 30-8-92 to 10.30 a. m. of 31-8-92. Due to the afore-said high handed acts the children and mother of the complainant became ill and they were sent to the hospital for treatment. Thereafter, he was forcibly taken to his office, which is situated in Darbhanga House, and they also ransacked his office and after that he was forcibly taken to C. B. I. Office and there the accused persons forced him to sign on nomo papers without going through its contents. Due to the aforesaid high handed acts the complainant fell ill and was under the treatment of a doctor. The accused persons with a view to save their skin have filed a frivolous case being RC case No.17-A of 1992 which has been challenged by the complainant in the High court.

5. It is also stated by the complainant in the complaint petition that the accused persons have defamed him and after giving threat and giving false information they took his signatures on forms, papers without explaining the same. They have disturbed the entire house and also caused mischief by taking some of the important item of the house and his mother and children were also tortured by keeping them confined in a room. He was wrongfully restrained and was put to fear of arrest and also of instant hurt at the time of taking away important documents and cassettes etc.

6. On 16-9-92 the Chief Judicial magistrate, Ranchi after examining the complainant on solemn affirmation and after perusing the complaint transferred the case under Sec.192 Cr. P. C. to the judicial Magistrate First Class, Ranchi.

7. One of the accused petitioners, namely, Sri N. C. Dhoundial of Cr. Misc. No.5937/96 (R) challenged the aforesaid order