UTTARANCHAL HIGH COURT
HONB'LE P. C. VERMA A. C.J. AND M. M. GHILDIYAL, J.
Anant Kumar Singh – Petitioner
Versus
The Central Bureau of Investigation – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 467 (M/B) of 2003
Decided on : 22.7.2003
Criminal Proceeding - Quashing of Chargesheet - Indian Penal Code - Section 302, 324 & 326 read with Section 34
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash the Charge-sheet and criminal proceeding against him, arguing that the alleged offenses were committed in the discharge of his official duty and were protected under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The State Government refused to grant sanction for prosecution after considering the full facts of the Charge-sheet.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's actions were in good faith and in official discharge of duty, and therefore, protected under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court also noted that the refusal of sanction by the State Government had not been challenged by the prosecuting agency.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner's actions were protected under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code and whether the criminal proceeding should be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's actions were in good faith and in official discharge of duty, and therefore, protected under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court also emphasized that the refusal of sanction by the State Government had not been challenged by the prosecuting agency.
Final Decision: The court set aside the order of cognizance and quashed the criminal proceeding against the petitioner, as his actions were protected under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the Charge-sheet and criminal pro ceeding arising thereof, contained in Annexure No. l to the writ petition, includ ing the order of cognizance of the said crime number, contained in Annexure No. 1-A to the writ petition, in case No. 42 of 1996 Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and others versus Anant Kumar Singh and oth ers pending in the Court of Judicial Magis trate (CBI), Dehradun arising out of R. C. No. 2 (S) of 1995 and 3 (3) of 1995, under Section 302, 324 & 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on the ground that allegations contained in the Charge sheet relating to the discharge of the offi cial duties of the petitioner being a public servant are incorrect. The sanction sought by CBI under Section 197 Criminal Pro cedure Code has been refused by the State Government and the CBI has not chal lenged the said refusal order by the State Government. Therefore, the learned Mag istrate has no right and jurisdiction either to take cognizance or to proceed against the petitioner and the entire proceedings on the basis of Charge-sheet is liable to be quashed.
2. Brief facts of the case are stated thus; that the protagonists of the Uttarakhand agitation had organized a rally at Delhi on 2. 10. 1994 to demonstrate against the reservation policy of the State Government and to press their demand for separate Statehood. Although the N. C. T. Government of Delhi had granted them permission to hold rally, it had banned the carrying of arms spears lathis or any other lethal weapon in the whole of Delhi and requested the U. P Government to make proper arrangement for search and not to permit any rallyists to enter Delhi with these weapons. Government of India also issued detailed instructions regarding promulga tion of prohibitory order, arrangements of search, seizure and arrests in cases of vio lation of prohibitory order, round the clock continuous vigilance, surveillance and patrolling and exchange of information. In the forenoon of 30. 9. 1994 the Divisional Commissioner, Meerut Division held a meeting of all the District Magistrate, Sen ior Superintendents of Police/superintend ents of Police of the six districts of the divi sion in which the Inspector General (Po lice), Meerut Zone and the Dy. Inspector General of Police, Meerut Range also par ticipated. In this meeting the officers were instructed to make proper arrangements for the checking of bus permits, arms etc. in their respective districts. In the same after noon a meeting was also held at the level of the Commissioner of Police, Delhi to re view the preparations made by the State Government in this regard in which the I. G. and D. I. G. , Meerut Zone/range also par ticipated. In furtherance of the decisions taken in the meeting held at various levels and verbal instructions received from the Director General of Police, UP the D. I. G. , Meerut Range issued written instructions in this regard on 1. 10. 1994. All these let ters/instructions have been annexed in the writ petition as Annexures 3 to 7.
3. In compliance of the above orders elaborate arrangements were made for checking of arms/ ammunitions and other weapons from 8. 00 a. m. on 1. 10. 1994. This arrangement had worked smoothly and the officers/officials on duty were able to search the passengers and buses and to allow them to proceed further for Delhi. But when the rallyists came in large number and refused to undergo the process of search, the officers on duty repeatedly ex plained to them the instructions regarding checking and requested them to subject themselves to search and proceed further. The rallyists had some misunderstanding that the administration was there to some how stop them from proceeding further and thus, the more efforts were made to ex plain to them the need for search, the more was the resistance and violence from the rallyists. When the rallyists tried to proceed further forcibly witho
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.