S.K. Chawla, J. -- 1. This revision is directed against an order of Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind, rejecting an accused's application that criminal proceedings against him be dropped in the absence of sanction by the State Government under section 197 Cr. P.C.

2. It is said that on 28.6.1991 at village Parrawan P.S. Mehgaon in Bhind district (M.P.) three accused named Mahadeo Singh, Availakh Singh and Nihal Singh (non-applicants 2 to 4 in this revision petition) committed criminal trespass in the house of one Balwan Singh at about 7. AM. They were armed with axes and lohangi. They assaulted the inmates of that house with those weapons. Balwan Singh, his father Bishan Singh and brother Dhyan Singh were injured in the incident. Bishan Singh had sustained an injury at the back of his head and succumbed to that injury on 2.7.1991 while admitted in J.A Group of hospitals, Gwalior. The F.I.R. of the incident was lodged at 8.30,AM. on the very day of the incident by Balwan Singh. The injured persons, including deceased Bishan Singh, were medically examined at 9.15 AM. on that day by Assistant Surgeon of Mehgaon P.H.C. Dr. Awtar Singh (petitioner in this revision petition). In injury report given with respect to deceased Bishan Singh, Dr. Awtar Singh interalia stated that the deceased had a tri-armed star shaped lacerated wound on the back of his skull, which was caused by hard and blunt object. After the death of deceased Bishan Singh, Dr. J.N. Soni of J.A Group of hospitals, Gwalior performed post-mortem examination and he gave opinion in the post-mortem report that injury on the head of the deceased had been caused by hard, sharp cutting object. The prosecution case is that injury to the deceased on his head was caused by means of an axe by one of the three assailants. Dr. Awtar Singh, however, gave a false report, already referred to, that the deceased had sustained on his head a lacerated wound caused by hard and blunt object. He had given that false report with the intention of screening the assailants from legal punishment. On these allegations, prosecution was launched against the three assailants for offences under sections 452, 302 and 324 LP.C. and against Dr. Awtar Singh for the offence under section 201 I.P.C.

3. Dr. Awtar Singh made an application on 23-3-1992 to the Third- Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind, that criminal proceedings against him be dropped in the absence of sanction from the State Government under section 197 Cr. P.C. The learned Judge, however, rejected that application and also finding that prima facie case against all the four accused persons, including Dr. Awtar Singh under section 201 I.P.C., was disclosed, framed charges against them by order dated 15-6-1992. Aggrieved by that order, Dr. Awtar Singh has come in revision to this Court. .

4. In the impugned order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has observed that in his view Dr. Awtar Singh had given a false injury report "knowingly and with some ulterior motive." He further observed that it was only if a public servant had committed a bona fide mistake in the discharge of his public functions, that he was entitled to protection under section 197 Cr. P.c. requiring previous sanction of the Government. But if the act of the public servant was, what the learned Judge observed, "deliberate and with mala fide intention", as was the act of Dr. Awtar Singh, he was not entitled to any protection under section 197 Cr. P.C. It is the correctness of this view which falls to be considered in this revision petition.

5. It must be said at the outset that the learned Additional Sessions Judge should not have expressed so strongly and categorically in the impugned order, as to give a finding that accused Dr. Awtar Singh had given a false injury report. Such a finding at the stage of framing charges was not called for. That could be criticised as prejudging of the case on merits against Dr. Awtar Singh under section 201 I.P.C. The argument advanced on beha