S.S. BYAS, J.—By this revision, the complainant Jethmal challenges the legality of the order of the learned Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Sojat dated August 14, 1978, by which he dismissed his complaint on the ground that the accused could not be prosecuted for want of sanction of the State Government under section 197, Cr. P. C. There is no pronouncement of this Court on the point involved.

2. Briefly stated, the relevant facts giving rise to this revision petition are that the complainant filed a complaint against the accused Khusalsingh—the then Station House Officer, Police Station Sojat in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate on December 23, 1977. The averments disclosed in the complaint were that a case under section 452, I. P. C. on F. I. R. No. 135/77 was registered against him at Police Station, Sojat by the accused. The accused was bent-upon to arrest and hand cuffle him. The complainant moved the Sessions Judge, Pali under section 438, Cr. P. C. for anticipatory bail and anticipatory bail was granted to him on December 3, 1977. The accused became highly annoyed when he failed in his attempt to arrest the complainant in the aforesaid case. In order to execute his ill-design to arrest the complainant, the accused registered a case under section 110, Cr. P. C. against him after when the order of anticipatory bail was passed by the learned Sessions Judge. At about 5.00 A. M. on December 22, 1977, the complainant was called at Police Out Post, Chandawal by the accused. The accused asked him to furnish bail bonds in F.I.R No. 135/1977 as per directions of the Sessions Judge. The complainant submitted the bail-bonds. The accused thereafter told the complainant that through he was released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case, he was, being arrested in another case under section 110, Cr.P.C. The complainant told the accused that he be also released on bail in the proceedings under section 110. Cr. P. C. as there was a provision for bail in that proceedings The accused did not relent and refused to release him on bail. The complainant was brought from Chandawal to Police Station, Sojat and was lodged there in the lock-up. At about 11.00 P.M. the complainants Abvocate Shri Rameshwar Lal alongwith some other persons approached the accused and requested him to release the complainant as there was a provision of bail in a proceeding under sec. 110, Cr. P. C. The accused even then did not relent and refused to release the complainant on bail. Next day, the complainant was produced before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sojat who ultimately enlarged him on bail. It was averred that the accused unlawfully arrested and detained the complainant and thus committed an offence under sec. 342, I.P.C. The learned Magistrate, after holding an enquiry under sec. 200 Cr.P.C, summoned the accused to face trail under sec. 342, I.P.C. The accused appeared before the learned Magistrate and submitted an application that he could not be prosecuted for want of sanction under sec. 197, Cr. P. C. of the State Government. It was stated by him that he arrested the complainant while discharging his duties of a public servant in the maintenance of public order. The State Government by a notification has extended the provisions of Section 197 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to Police Officials of all ranks charged with the maintenance of public order. Since no sanction of the State Government was obtained for his prosecution, no cognizance of the offence could be taken againsthim and the criminal proceedings should be dropped. The objection raised by the accused found favour with the learned Magistrate. Accepting the objection, the learned Magistrate dropped the proceedings in the criminal case. Aggrieved against the said order of the learned Magistrate, the complainant has come up in revision.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The complainant was arrested in a proceeding under section 110 of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document