Sanction for prosecution of public servant under Section 197 Cr.P.C. is not required if the allegations in the complaint do not attract the provisions of Section 197.

I.D.Dua, J.

1. The petitioner Giani Ajmer Singh Secretary, Shiromani Akali Dal, Amritsar has approached this Court under sections 435 and 439 Code of Criminal Procedure praying for setting aside the order of the Additional Sessions Judge dated 16-5-1962 affirming on revision the order of the Additional Sessions Judge of the District Magistrate, dated 9-4-1962. The two impugned order held the petitioners complaint against S. Ranjit Singh Grewal Senior Superintendent of Police, under Section 427, 435, 193 and 195 of the Indian Penal Code not to be entertainable without the previous sanction as contemplated by section 197 Criminal Procedure Code. This revision was admitted by a learned Single Judge of this Court after perusing the records which had been sent for by him. Notice was issued as far back as 5th the revision has not so far been disposed of. In cases of this nature, I need hardly emphasise that and undue delay might well defeat the cause of justice.

2. Before me the learned counsel for the petitioner has readout the complaint and has submitted that the real gravamen of ht allegations in the complaint is that on 22nd of October 1962 after the procession taken out in Taru Taran as a protect against the irregularities committed in the counting of the votes of Sarhali constituency where from Sardar Partap Singh Kairon the present Chief Minister has been declared elected defeating the rival Akali candidate Mohan Singh Tur had been teargases and dispersed the respondent in order o justify the wrongful improper and undulated for use of the tear-gas on the crowd and use of violence caused efferent doors, window-panes etc. of the Tehsil building to be smashed with the help of the police party under his control ; similarly some wooden khokhas situated outside the Tehsil which were used as temporary office of lawyers and petition-writers were also set at fire by the police party at the instance of the respondent. This action of the respondent according amount to offences under section 427 and 435 Indian Penal Code and since these acts were committed with the intention of creating circumstances which may appear in evidence in judicial proceedings or in other proceedings taken by law before a public servant to induce an erroneous opinion touching points material to the result of such proceedings they also fell within the purview of sections 193 and 195, Indian Penal Code. Emphases has been laid on the submission that these allegations do not attract the provisions of section 197 of the Code.

3. Here I think it would be desirable to reproduce section 197:

197. Prosecution of Judges and Public servants-- (1) When any person who is a Judge within the meaning of section 19 of the meaning of section 19 of the Indian Penal Code or when any Magistrate or when any public servant who is not removable from his office save by or with the section of a State Government or the Central Government is accused of any offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or proper ting to act in the discharge of his official duty no Court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction- (a) in the case of a person employed in connection with the affairs of the Union, of the Central Government and

(b) in the case of a person employed in connection with the affairs of a State, of the State Government.

(2) Power of Central or State Governments as to prosecution-The Central Government or the State Government as the case may be, determine the person by whom the manner in which the offence or offences for which the prosecution of such Judge or public servants is to be conducted and may specify the Court before which the trial is to be held."

The petitioners contention is that the offence alleged in the complaint to have been committed by the respondent was not committed by the respondent while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of this official duty for the duty of a police officer does not lid in damaging publ