SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(J&K) 24

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
M.A.CHOWDHARY, J.
Bishnesh Kumar, S/o. Sh. Behari Lal – Petitioner 
Versus
Rajat Jandial, S/o. Sh. Ravinder Gupta – Respondent 
CRMC No.58 of 2019, CrlM No.209 of 2019[1 of 2019], CRM(M) No.344 of 2019 CrlM No. 824 of 2019, CRMC No.207 of 2014 IA No. 236 of 2014
Decided On : 10-04-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Zulkernain Choudhary, Adv.
For the Respondent:Ms. Tehseena Bukhari, Adv. & Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv vice Mr. A. K. Sawhney, Sr. Adv., Mr J. P. Gandhi, Advocate.

Police actions in raiding history-sheeter's house for arrest, including restraint of son, have reasonable nexus to official duties, attracting Section 197 CrPC protection requiring prior sanction for prosecution of protected public servants; proceedings quashed sans sanction.

Headnote:(A) J&K CrPC - Section 561-A (akin to Section 482 CrPC) - CrPC - Section 197 - RPC - Sections 341/342/447/452/506/166/120-B - Complaint against police officers alleging wrongful restraint, confinement, trespass, criminal intimidation etc. during raid to arrest history-sheeter involved in multiple cases including Arms Act offences - Acts committed while acting or purporting to act in discharge of official duties with reasonable nexus thereto - Protection under Section 197 CrPC applicable requiring previous sanction for cognizance against public servants not removable without government sanction - No such sanction obtained - Cognizance and proceedings quashed as abuse of process. (Paras 20-30)

(B) Section 197 CrPC - Scope - Expression 'official duty' denotes duty arising from office or position - Protection available if direct reasonable nexus between duties cast on public servant and act constituting offence - Even excess or purported exercise of duty covered if nexus exists - Not available merely because accused is public servant. (Paras 22-25)

(C) Police powers - Raid without warrant to arrest in cognizable offence against history-sheeter - Deployment of force and supervisory presence to ensure smooth arrest plausible - Restraining family member during enquiry about whereabouts not offence absent mens rea. (Paras 28-29)

Facts of the case:
Police team raided house to arrest history-sheeter facing 13 FIRs and secure him in cognizable case under Arms Act etc. - Complainant, son of accused, alleged interception of vehicle, abusive language, wrongful restraint, unauthorized entry, search, video recording infringing privacy - Magistrate conducted enquiry u/s 202 CrPC, took cognizance u/ss 341/342/506/166/120-B RPC, issued process despite no sanction u/s 197 CrPC - Revision dismissed upholding procedure and finding no nexus to official duty.

Findings of Court:
Acts inextricably linked to investigation and arrest; reasonable nexus to official duties established - Sanction mandatory for gazetted officers; proceedings unsustainable without it - Complaint malicious to harass officers and scuttle probe.

Issues: Whether acts of police officers during raid constituted offences independent of official duties requiring no sanction u/s 197 CrPC; validity of cognizance and process issuance without prior sanction; whether procedure under ss 202/204 CrPC followed correctly.

Ratio Decidendi: For protection u/s 197 CrPC, court examines if reasonable nexus exists between public servant's official duties and alleged acts - Nexus present in police actions for arrest in cognizable offence against history-sheeter, even with supervisory officers and force deployment - Sanction prerequisite for certain officers; absence renders cognizance illegal - Proceedings quashable as abuse if maliciously instituted.

Result: Petitions allowed - Complaint, cognizance order and revisional order quashed qua petitioners.

Table of Content
1. clubbing petitions for quashing proceedings (Para 1 , 2)
2. alleged illegal police raid and restraint (Para 3 , 10)
3. cognizance taken despite section 197 crpc (Para 4 , 5 , 11 , 13 , 14)
4. sanction required for prosecuting police officials (Para 6 , 7 , 12 , 16)
5. supervisory police presence reasonable (Para 9 , 15 , 19)
6. raid justified to arrest history-sheeter (Para 17 , 18)
7. section 197 mandates prior sanction (Para 20 , 21)
8. nexus test for official duty protection (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
9. gazetted officers need government sanction (Para 27)
10. police action plausible sans offence (Para 28)
11. quash proceedings as process abuse (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)

JUDGMENT :

M A CHOWDHARY, J.

1. By way of this common judgment, this court proposes to dispose of all the above titled clubbed four petitions, in view of identical and similar facts involved in them, arising out of the same complaint, cognizance order dated 05.11.2012 passed by the trial court and order dated 26.05.2014 passed by the Revisional Court upholding the cognizance order, against all the petitioners as accused.

2. Petitioners, invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court under Sections 561-A of J&K CrPC (akin to Section 482 CrPC and 528 BNSS), inter alia, have prayed quashing of the following:

(i) Criminal complaint under Sections 341/ 342 / 447 /452 /506 / 166/ 120-B RPC titled ‘Rajat Jandial V/S Sh. J. P. Sharma & Ors.’ pending in the Court of Ld. Sub Judge (Special Municipal Mobile Magistrate), Jammu;

(ii) Order dated 05.11.2012 whereby the Court of Ld. Sub-Judge (Special Municipal Mobile Magistrate), Jammu in the aforesaid complaint issued process against the petitioner and proforma respondents under Sections 341/342/506/166/120-B RPC; and

(iii) Order dated 26.05.2014, whereby the Court of Ld. Sessions Judge, Jammu dismissed the revision petition No. 51/Revision titled ‘Rajeshwar Singh & Ors. V/S Rajat Jandial & Ors’ thereby upholding the order of the learned trial court dated 05.11.2012.”

3. A complaint titled ‘Rajat Jandial V. J. P. Sharma & Ors.’ came to be filed for the commission of offences punishable U/Ss 341/342/447/448/452/506/166/120-B RPC against the police officers, including the petitioners herein, by respondent No.1-Rajat Jandial before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu with the accusations that on 20.01.2012, the accused police officers along with a strong posse of police personnel reached the house of the complainant at Greater Kailash, Jammu and the entire area was cordoned; that at about 3.30- 3.45 pm, when complainant was about to leave in car No.JK02-AU-0018 , for Jammu Airport, he was intercepted by SHO, P/S Gangyal, Jammu who used abusive, aggressive and insulting language, asked the complainant whether he was Gola Shah’s son and on getting reply in affirmative, his car was stopped and he was wrongfully restrained; that the said SHO called the other police officers including petitioner Abdul Jabbar from a nearby parked Hyundai vehicle and all the accused entered into the house of the complainant, with the intention to arrest the father of the complainant and during the said exercise, they allegedly committed several illegalities; that the presence of petitioner Bishnesh Kumar, SHO Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Jammu and Abdul Jabbar ASP was ‘prima facie’ abuse of authority as they were neither associated with any team nor the case, therefore, they were illegally present there; that the raid without any orders is illegal and amounts to excessing of jurisdiction; that the whole incident of raid was allegedly recorded in camera by one police constable brought on spot by Bishnesh Kumar, SHO Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, which is not permitted under law as it infringes the right to privacy of a citizen especially when women reside in that house.

4. The learned Special Municipal Magistrate, Jammu, vide order dated 05.11.2012, took cognizance against accused including the petitioners herein for the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top