The petitioner is the sole accused in C.C.No.6/04 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Vadakara. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the complaint, Annexure-IV and all further proceedings against the petitioner. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 342 and 323 of IPC, which was taken cognizance by the learned Magistrate on the basis of the oral complaint made by the 2nd respondent herein, when he was produced before the learned Magistrate after arrest in Crime No.572/03 of Vadakara Police Station as per Annexure-I FIR. Annexure II is the search list. Annexure III is the remand report. The allegation against the petitioner is that while he arrested the 2nd respondent during investigation of Crime No.572/03 of Vadakara Police Station on 25.9.2003, he manhandled the 2nd respondent as disclosed to the Magistrate, which was recorded in Annexure IV. The learned Magistrate after 202 enquiry and after recording the sworn statement of the second respondent and three other witnesses took cognizance of the case against the petitioner, which is pending before the Court of J.F.C.M., Vadakara as C.C.No.6/04. The second respondent has also filed a complaint with the same allegations before the Deputy Superintendent of Police as well as before the DIG of Police, who conducted Departmental Enquiry and the petitioner was exonerated as per Annexure VI order. It is alleged in this petition that before taking cognizance of the case against the petitioner, sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. has not been obtained and no offence as alleged is made out against the petitioner and by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the entire proceedings in C.C.No.6/2004 on the file of Court of J.F.C.M., Vadakara be quashed.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in Annexure IV complaint and that he was on official duty and arrested the second respondent on 1.10.2003 in Crime No.572/03 of Vadakara Police Station in respect of an offence under Section 402 of IPC registered against the 2nd respondent and four others. True copy of the FIR is produced as Annexure I. After arrest, the 2nd respondent was produced before the learned Magistrate on the same day at 8PM, as revealed from the remand report Annexure III. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner has complied with all the formalities while arresting the 2nd respondent and this petition is not maintainable for the reason that sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. has not been obtained before prosecuting the petitioner, who is admittedly the Sub Inspector of Police, Vadakara and was on official duty and arrested the 2nd respondent in Crime No.572/03. Thus, it is the case of the petitioner that no sanction has been obtained under Section 197(1) Cr.P.C. to prosecute him and therefore the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate is unsustainable in law, as it violates the mandate of Section 197(3) Cr.P.C.

4. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submitted that the complaint of the 2nd respondent as revealed from Annexure IV is regarding custodial assault and manhandling and the alleged overt acts against the complainant cannot be said to be the acts done in the discharge of his official duty or in the purported discharge of his official duty.

5. It cannot be disputed that the second respondent was arrested by the petitioner herein, who is the accused in Crime No.572/03. The offence alleged against the second respondent was under Section 402 of IPC. Thus, it is clear that on 1.10.2003, the petitioner had taken custody of the 2nd respondent in discharge of his official duty as the Sub Inspector of Police, Vadakara Police Station, during investigation of Crime No.572/2003. Even