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

2025 Supreme(Jhk) 1823

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Jitendra Kumar Pradhan S/o Jagabandu - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr.M.P. No.425 of 2025
Decided on : 25-08-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Pradyumna Poddar, Advocate Mr. Mukul Raj, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Pankaj Kumar Mishra, Addl.P.P.

A public servant, even if alleged to have exceeded duty, requires sanction for prosecution if there exists a reasonable nexus with official duties, particularly in self-defense scenarios.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 197 - Quashing of cognizance - Petitioner, a Central Reserve Police Force personnel, sought to quash proceedings under Section 302 IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act due to lack of sanction for prosecution - It was established that petitioner acted in self-defense against perceived naxalites - Court found the lower court’s cognizance to be perverse and unsustainable in law. (Paras 5, 10, 12)

(B) Sanction for Prosecution - Courts emphasized that even an act exceeding official duty requires sanction if there is a reasonable connection to official duties, as established in various case laws referenced including G.C. Manjunath & Others vs. Seetaram and Sankaran Moitra vs. Sadhna Das. (Paras 5, 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was involved in a firefight with suspected naxalites while on duty; an injury was caused during this encounter, leading to legal proceedings. The lower court took cognizance despite the absence of sanction. (Paras 2-4)

Findings of Court:
The court quashed the proceedings against the petitioner as the lower court's cognizance was deemed legally unsustainable. (Paras 11-12)

Issues: Whether the act of the petitioner was in discharge of his official duties and whether prior sanction for prosecution was necessary. (Paras 5, 10)

Ratio Decidendi: The petitioner’s action was within the ambit of self-defense against armed individuals perceived as naxalites, thereby necessitating sanction protection under Section 197. The lower court's conclusion was found to have no legal grounding. (Paras 8, 10)

Result: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition allowed; entire proceedings quashed.

Table of Content
1. factual details of the incident involved. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. arguments regarding requirement of sanction. (Para 5 , 6)
3. court's reasoning on legality of actions. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. criminal proceedings quashed due to lack of sanction. (Para 11 , 12)
5. final orders and disposal of the petition. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)

JUDGMENT :

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.

Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 with a prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceedings including the order dated 06.06.2023 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khunti in connection with Murhu P.S. Case No.24 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No.124 of 2023 whereby and where under the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khunti has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Section 27 of the ARMS ACT against the petitioner.

3. The undisputed fact is that the petitioner is a personnel of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and on the alleged date of occurrence, he was a general duty constable of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF).

4. The brief fact of the case is that because of naxalites’ movement in the place of occurrence locality, Battalion of Central Reserve Police Force was deployed in the locality of the place of occurrence and the petitioner was a part of that Central Reserve Police Force and in a joint operation with the local police, the petitioner was deployed in the locality as a part of the team. In the night of 19.03.2020, the naxalites fired upon a unit of the Battalion of that Central Reserve Police Force and the firing was returned by the Jawans of the Battalions of that Central Reserve Police Force. The exchange of firing continued for 10 to 15 minutes. On seeing that the CRPF team is dominating the naxalites, the naxalites fled away, taking advantage of the night. A meeting was called by the Commandant of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) along with the Superintendent of Police, Khunti and other connected police officers and it was decided that in the morning at around 4:00 AM to 4:30 AM, a joint team of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) QAT force, Khunti and QAT force Murhu will be sent as reinforcement. A motorcycle borne police and security forces party proceeded at 4:40 AM and another team was sent at 5:30 AM. There was a noise of 2-3 rounds of firing. The information was received by the informant-in-charge of 94-Battalion Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) that a person has sustained injury in firing. The person was shifted to hospital and upon enquiry, the informant came to know that the petitioner has fired upon the injured and the reason for firing is that at about 5:45 AM from the side of Kumardih, two persons riding a motorcycle at high speed were going towards school. The petitioner indicated the riders of the motorcycle to stop. The riders of the motorcycle stopped their motorcycle and when the petitioner reached near their motorcycle, the riders of the motorcycle threw something kept in a sack and wanted to flee way. The petitioner and others tried to stop them but they pushed the petitioner and fled away. They were directed to stop by being told loudly. It appeared to the petitioner and the force accompanying him that some explosive substances and arms have been kept in the sack. In the meantime, there was a sound of firing, hence, it appeared to the petitioner that the persons riding motorcycle are naxalites. Hence, in response to such firing, the petitioner in his self-defence also fired upon them and the injured sustained bullet injury on being fired by the petitioner. Later on, the injured was treated by the Doctor. Police registered Murhu P.S. Case No.24 of 2020 on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant and took up investigation of the case. The sanction for prosecution of the petit

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