The main legal point established in the judgment is that the protection under Section 197(1) of the Cr.P.C. applies only to acts or omissions connected to the discharge of official duty by a public servant.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner has challenged order dated 09.02.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Doda, whereby the said court while exercising its revisional jurisdiction, has set aside order dated 16.10.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Doda in terms whereof the petitioner herein has been discharged and the charge sheet has been dismissed.

2. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record.

3. It appears that a charge sheet arising out of FIR No. 06/2022 for offences under Sections 357, 323 and 506 IPC was laid before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Doda against the petitioner herein. As per the prosecution case, on 07.01.2022 at around 01.00 pm, when the complainant, Doulat Ram, Assistant Executive Engineer, Jammu Power Distribution Corporation Limited (JPDCL) was discussing certain matter in the office chamber of the petitioner, who happened to be the Executive Engineer, JPDCL Sub Division, Doda at the relevant time, the petitioner started shouting and picked up a wooden rod with which he hit the complainant on his head. This resulted in injuries to the complainant and blood oozed out of his left ear.

4. At the time of considering the question of charge/discharge of the accused, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, concluded that the petitioner/accused has exceeded his powers while discharging his official duty and there is reasonable connection between the alleged act of the petitioner and performance of his official duty. Thus, according to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, the petitioner is entitled to protection of Section 197 of the Cr.P.C and without the previous sanction of the Government, prosecution could not have been launched against him. Accordingly, the petitioner was discharged and the charge sheet was dismissed.

5. Against the aforesaid order, a revision petition came to be filed by the respondent-State before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Doda, who vide the impugned order allowed the revision petition and set aside the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. While doing so, the learned Additional Sessions Judge observed that to wield a wooded rod and inflict injuries on a colleague public servant is not a part of official duty of a public servant. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to protection of Section 197 Cr. P.C.

6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that it is the admitted case of the parties that the alleged act took place in the office chamber of the petitioner when certain official matters were being discussed with the complainant. He has further submitted that during the course of this meeting the petitioner is alleged to have beaten up the complainant with a wooden rod and as such, the said act of the petitioner is integrally connected with discharge of his official duty, hence, protection under Section 197 of the Cr. P.C. is available to him. In this regard, reliance has been placed upon the raitio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa through Kumar Raghvendra Singh vs. Ganesh Chandra Jew, 2004 (8) SCC 40.

7. If we have a look at the provisions contained in Section 197 Cr. P.C., it provide that if any person or a public servant not removable from his office except by or with the sanction of the Government, is accused of an offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in discharge of his official duty, the Court cannot take cognizance of such offence without the previous sanction. While considering the question whether a particular act of a public servant removable from office with the sanction of the Government is protected by Section 197 of the Cr. P.C, it has to be ascertained whether he has committed such act in discharge of his official duty or in purported discharge of his official duty, meaning thereby that even if, the act complained of, has not been committed by a person in discharge of his o