Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 16130
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
V. G. Arun, J
SUDHEESHKUMAR S – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl.MC 2354/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: DIPU.R, G.N.DEEPA, K.S.BAIJU, DHANYA BABU, NEETHU SASI, RAISSA BABU, ANSU SARA MATHEW
For the Respondents: SMT. PUSHPALATHA. M.K, SR.PP.
Protection under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. is applicable even when officials exceed their duties if the actions are related to their official function.
Headnote:The petitioners were accused of torture during interrogation, allegedly violating several IPC sections. The court examined the necessity of sanction under Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. It was determined that if an official's actions, even if excessive, are connected to their duties, they may be protected by Section 197. The previous order was quashed, and the trial court was instructed to reconsider the discharge petition.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1947 CRL.MC NO. 2354 OF 2025 CRIME NO.736/2018 OF Chalakkudy Police Station, Thrissur AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 28.01.2025 IN CC NO.330 OF 2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, CHALAKUDY PETITIONERS:
1 SUDHEESHKUMAR S, AGED 42 YEARS ANNJILACHIRA HOUSE, C.M.C 27, CHERTHALA P.O, CHERTHALA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688524
2 LINEESH C.A, AGED 44 YEARS CHEMBOTHINGAL PARAMBIL HOUSE, MOSCOW JUNCTION, POTTA P.O, CHALAKUDY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680722
3 SREEKANTH S, AGED 38 YEARS DURGA VEEDU, CHALINGADE P.O, KAIPPAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALOOR TALUK, THRISSUR, PIN -
680681
4 JOSEPH C A, AGED 57 YEARS CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE,VETTILAPARA P.O, ATHIRAPPALLY VILLAGE, CHALAKUDY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680721
5 PAULSON STEPHEN, AGED 43 YEARS KOLLAMKUDI HOUSE, KALADY P.O, MELEKALADI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683574
6 SATHEESAN N N, AGED 60 YEARS NEDUNGATTEVELIYIL HOUSE, S.L PURAM P.O, KANJIKUZHI VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688523 BY ADVS.
DIPU.R G.N.DEEPA K.S.BAIJU DHANYA BABU NEETHU SASI RAISSA BABU ANSU SARA MATHEW RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, HIGH COURT BUILDING, ERNAKULAM., PIN -
682031
2 SHINTO P.J, AGED 31 YEARS PARIYAARATHUVEETIL, KOLLAMKODE DESOM, AYYAMBUZHA VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683581
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION, CHALAKUDY P.O, THRISSUR, PIN - 680307 OTHER PRESENT:
SMT. PUSHPALATHA. M.K, SR.PP.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
18.03.2025, THE COURT ON 26.03.2025 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V.G.ARUN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Crl.M.C.No.2354 of 2025 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 26th day of March, 2025
ORDER
The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 6 in Crime No.736 of
2018 registered at the Chalakudy Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 506, 167 and 330 r/w 34 of IPC. The prosecution allegations are to the following effect;
The petitioners, while working as officials at the Vettilappara Forest Range, tortured the defacto complainant, during his interrogation in O.R.No.16 of 2018 of the Konnakuzhy Forest Station. It is alleged that under the guise of interrogation, the de facto complainant was taken to a cashew plantation and assaulted brutally.
2. On submission of the Final Report, the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chalakudy took cognisance of the offences and numbered the case as C.C No.330 of 2019. The petitioners had earlier approached this Court seeking to quash the proceedings against them, but were relegated to the trial court with liberty to file discharge petition. Accordingly, petitioners filed the discharge petition, which the learned Magistrate dismissed as per Annexure 6 order. Aggrieved, this Crl.M.C is filed seeking the following reliefs;
“i. Quash Annexure 6 order, ie, order in CMP No.10728/2024 in C.C No.330/2019, dated 28/1/2025, of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate Chalakkudy.
ii. Quash Annexure 1 final report in C.C No.330/2019, on the files of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chalakkudy. “
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the allegation of torture is false. Moreover, since the allegation is of having assaulted the de facto complainant during the course of interrogation, sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C is mandatory. Therefore, the trial court committed gross illegality in rejecting the discharge petition by holding that the petitioners' action is wholly unrelated to official duty and hence sanction is not necessary.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that physically assaulting an accused is not part of duty of an officer invested with the power of interrogation.
5. The following facts are not in dispute;
The de facto complainant is an accused in O.R.No.16 of
2018 of Konnakuzhy Forest Station registered for offences punishable under Section
