ORDER :

1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. against the order dated 07.11.2015 (Annexure A/1) passed by Seventh Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) in Criminal Revision No. 176/2015 (Rakesh Kumar Joshi Vs. Manohar Jethani & another), affirming the order dated 03.11.2011 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhilai-3, District-Durg (C.G.) in Complaint Case No. 3330/2011, wherein, the trial court has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 166, 339, 499 & 506 of I.P.C. against the petitioner.

2. The brief facts as projected by the petitioner are that learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhilai-3 has registered Complaint Case No. 3330/2011 against the petitioner and summon was issued to the petitioner. At the relevant time, the petitioner was posted as Thana in-charge of Police Station-Bhilai-3, District-Durg (C.G.). Respondent No. 1/Complainant- Manohar Jethani, who is an advocate by profession (as stated in his evidence) filed a complaint on 20.11.2009 against the petitioner under Section 200 of I.P.C. mainly contending that there is dispute with his younger brother-Anil Jethani, who is active member of Bhartiya Janta Party, with regard to distribution of property. Younger brother of the complainant and his wife were creating undue pressure and hindrance in utilizing the property. Younger brother has also threatened the complainant so many occasions and also threatened that he would be prosecuted in various cases.

3. It has been further contended in the Complaint that he had submitted written complaint to Superintendent of police about conduct of his brother and his wife and he was explaining this fact to the petitioner on 13/05/2009 then all of a sudden petitioner on account of excitement and by losing his tamper had thrown away his name plate and he told that the said complaint filed by the complainant will not affect adversely to the petitioner. Again on 20/5/2009 when he went to Police Station-Bhilai- 3 some persons were sitting in the chamber and were supporting the case of his brother by saying that documents of complainant are forged and fabricated one. The petitioner was supporting case of his brother which is not official duty of petitioner. The act committed by the petitioner is an offence punishable under Sections 166, 339, 499 & 506 of I.P.C. and he would submit that the petitioner may not be prosecuted for the said offence.

4. Complainant examined himself and his wife on 23.03.2010. The complainant has also examined one Reader posted in the office of Senior Superintendent of Police, Durg, wherein he has stated that the complainant has submitted complaint to Senior Superintendent of Police, Durg. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class considering the evidence on record, registered the complaint for committing offence punishable under Sections 166, 339, 499 & 506 of I.P.C.

5. The petitioner being aggrieved with registration of offence, filed Criminal Revision No. 176/2015 under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C. contending that the petitioner has discharged his official duty, therefore, as per Section 197 (2) of I.P.C., no complaint against any public servant can be registered without sanction from Government, therefore, the complaint itself is not maintainable and same deserves to be dismissed by the Revisional Court. It was further contended that there was family dispute between complainant and his brother, he is unnecessary roped in the complaint.

6. The Revisional Court vide its order dated 07.11.2015 (Annexure A/1) dismissed the revision petition by recording finding that the Government servant cannot take shelter of every illegal act committed by him unless there is nexus with the official duty while discharging his official duty, therefore, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class has not committed any material illegality or irregularity in registration of offence against the petitioner and accordingly, dismissed the criminal