MEWALAL Vs. TOTALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case the only question involved is as regards the necessity of sanction under Section 197, Cr. P. Code, before the accused could be prosecuted. The charges me under Sections 500 and 504, I. P. C. , and the accused is a judicial officer. The circumstances alleged are that on 24-12-1953 the complainant was being examined as a witness in a civil case, which was going on before the said judicial officer. At that time he, in temper used the expression 'nalayak' (unfit) in relation to the complainant twice and on the third occasion, he said 'nalayak, you will be turned out of Court-room after beating with shoes'.

(2.) A complaint was filed on these allegations. An objection to the entertainability of this complaint was taken on the ground that it cannot proceed in the absence of sanction as required under Section 197, Cr. P. C. , as the act complained of could not have been done except in the purported exercise of his official duty or in other words it lay within the scope of his official duty. The objection was upheld and the accused was discharged.

(3.) A revision-petition was filed against this decision and that too was rejected. Both the Courts relied upon the decision in H. H. B. Gill v. The King, AIR 1948 PC 128 (A); Hori Ram Singh v. Emperor, AIR 1939 FC 43 (B); Amrik Singh v. State of pepsu, AIR 1955 SC 309 (C); and decision of Madhya Bharat High Court, reported in Ramchandra v. Premchand, 1953 Madh B LJ 1054 (D ). The last-mentioned case contained facts somewhat akin to the present case.