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

2002 Supreme(MP) 917

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
NARAIN SINGH
RAGHAV CHANDRA - Appellant
Versus
TARVINDER KAUR - Respondents
M. CR. C. 1676 Of 2000
Decided On : 09/17/2002

Advocates Appeared:
AJAY MISHRA, Vasant Daniel

Headnote:

SANCTION - Criminal Case - I.P.C. 395, 448, 427 - The court discussed the application of Section 197 of the Cr. P. C. and the protection it provides to public servants against prosecution for acts done in discharge of official duty. The judgment highlighted the intention behind Section 197 to prevent public servants from unnecessary harassment and concluded that the alleged acts of the petitioners were done in discharge of their official duty, thus making the protection under Section 197 available to them.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought quashment of Criminal Case No. 66/2000, pending against them in the Court of J. M. F. C. Jabalpur, wherein, cognizance of offences punishable u/s. 395, 448 and 427 of the I. P. C. is taken, on the private complaint filed by the respondent. The petitioners argued that the alleged acts were done in discharge of their official duty and thus the protection provided under Section 197 of the Cr. P. C. was available to them.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the alleged acts of the petitioners were done in discharge of their official duty and concluded that the protection provided under Section 197 of the Cr. P. C. was available to them, meant to assure them to discharge the official duty fairly and fearlessly.

Issues: The main issue was the availability of protection under Section 197 of the Cr. P. C. to the petitioners against prosecution for acts done in discharge of official duty.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the test laid down in Pukhraj v. State of Rajasthan to determine if the alleged acts of the petitioners were done in discharge of their official duty and concluded that the protection provided under Section 197 of the Cr. P. C. was available to them.

Final Decision: Criminal Case No. 66/2000, pending in the Court of J. M. F. C. Jabalpur, against the petitioners, stands quashed.

NARAIN SINGH, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners seek quash-ment of Criminal Case No. 66/2000, pending against them in the Court of J. M. F. C. Jabalpur, wherein, cognizance of offences punishable u/s. 395, 448 and 427 of the I. P. C. is taken, on the private complaint filed by the respondent.

( 2 ) AS per the complaint, on 8/06/1992, at 10 p. m. petitioners Nos. 1 to 3, who were then posted as Collector, Addl. Collector and City Magistrate, Jabalpur, respectively, came to the residence of respondent situated at 1142, Prem Nagar, Jabalpur, along with 200 to 250 Policemen and surrounded the same. At the same time, Sardar Swarnjeet Singh, the elder brother of respondent's husband and Dhashmesh Singh Sethi alias Montu, the son of the sister of respondent's husband, who were staying at the residence of respondent, also reached her residence in Premier Padmini Car, belonging to the husband of the respondent, bearing No. MUZ-2067. The Police personnels searched this Car and then only permitted Sardar Swaranjeet Singh so also Montu to enter the house of the respondent, who at that time, was staying at her maternal home situated at Muzaffarnagar. All the Police persons were in uniform and were carrying deadly weapons like rifles and pistols. Sardar Swarnjeet Singh and Montu are stated to have narrated this sequence of incident to the respondent, that they saw Sardar Hardeep Singh, the husband of the respondent sitting in drawing room along with petitioners Nos. 1 and 2, xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx who were in plain clothes. There were some more persons in plain clothes and out of these persons, Raghav Chandra, petitioner No. 1, directed petitioner No. 3 K. C. Jain, to search the entire house. then K. C. Jain, the petitioner No. 3 along with Policemen, searched the house wherein, petitioner No. 2 Brijendra Kumar also joined K. C. Jain, after some time. petitioner No. 1 then asked Hardeep Singh to handover the keys of locked almirahs who expressed his inability on the ground that the keys are with his wife (respondent), who was at Muzaffarnagar, that time. Then Raghav Chandra directed to break-open the locks of almirahs and therefore, K. C. Jain and Brijendra Kumar got the locks of almirahas broke open, through the help of Policemen. Raghav Chandra further directed K. C. Jain to seize all the gold ornaments and cash amount from the almirahs. At the same time, one plain clothed person not only took away money from a child's purse, but they took away with them the remote control of the Television also. The suit-case (attache) of Sardar Swaranjeet Singh was also searched, which contained a total amount of Rs. 30,000/-, brought by Swarnjeet Singh from Akola for making purchases at Delhi. The petitioners took away the aforesaid money also with them. K. C. Jain snatched the gold chain of Dhashmesh Singh Sethi alias Montu in which word "montu" was inscribed in English letters on gold. This golden chain inclusive of locket weighed 15-16 gms. One golden ring on which English letter "m" was inscribed so also Titan watch, which Montu was wearing, were also taken away by K. C. Jain. The other accused Policemen cooked breakfast in the kitchen of the petitioner and utilised the entire food material available in the kitchen, including milk, Rasna, Tea, Coffee powder etc. and broke most of the valuable crockery, deliberately. The accused persons along with entire Police force stayed at the petitioner's residence till 5 a. m. on 9/06/1992. At the time of this incident, petitioners Nos. 1 to 3 along with other plain clothed persons entered in the girls hostel, who were making preparation for their exams. to be commenced the next morning and unnecessarily interrogated them till late night. Then the girls were called in the residential portion of the respondent's house where they were again questioned till 5 a. m. on 9-6-1992. Thereafter, the accused took away the respondent's husband with them and got the residential portion of the house locked by Sardar Swarnjeet Singh




















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