J.P. Chaturvedi, J. - (1.) THIS is an application under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. There are six applicants. Applicants 1 to 4 Babu Lal Pathak, R. R. Shangloo, Vishnu Gopal Shukla and V. B. Singh were Inspectors in the Central Excise Department and were posted at Jhansi at the relevant time. Applicants 5 and 6 R.P. Singh and Laxmi Narain were sepoys in the Central Excise. Applicants Nos. 1 to 4 had also been appointed Officers of Customs Department by the Central Government by notification dated 1st February, 1963. They were also appointed Gold Control Officers under the Gold Control Act, 1968.
(2.) ON 2nd May, 1973 at 6 P.M. these applicants went to the shop of Purshottam Narain alias Jhallu, goldsmith situate at Mauranipuj" in the district of Jhansi. They took search of the shop. But they could not find anything incriminating. They also took search of the house of Purshottam Narain and were not successful in getting anything incriminating although they weighed all the gold ornaments which the women of the house were putting on. The . gold and gel J ornaments found at the shop and the house of Purshottam Narain did not exceed the legal limit. Thereafter V. B. Singh, Inspector, started abusing Purshottam Narain. When he and Babu Lai Bi -latiya protested they did not stop abusing. Babu Lai Pathak on the other hand asked the tosspots, applicants Nos. 5 and 6 to catch hold of Purshottam Narain and Vishnu Gopal, R. K. Shangloo and V. P. Singh started beating him with sticks, with the result that he was seriously injured. Purshottam Narain alias Jhallu made complaint of the incident on 22nd May, 1973 in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi. In the course of complaint the present applicants made an application that the prosecution of the applicants may be quashed. This application was disposed of by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate by his order dated 29th September, 1974. He being of the opinion that the prosecution of the applicants was not barred by the provisions of Sections 197 Code of Criminal Procedure & 155 of the Customs Act. Another application was moved on behalf of the applicants on 20th November, 1974 in which they contended that the prosecution of the applicants was barred by section 137(2)(b), 155B of Customs Act 1962 and Sections 97(2) and 108 of Gold Control Act read with Section 197 Code of Criminal Procedure. This application was disposed of by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 13th February, 1975. He negatived the plea of the applicants.
(3.) IN this case the main contention on behalf of the applicants is that the prosecution of the applicants was barred by the provisions of section 197 Code of Criminal Procedure inasmuch as the applicants acted or purported to act in the discharge of their official duty and they were public servants removable by the Central Government. They could not, therefore, be prosecuted without the sanction of the Central Government. The following questions arise for consideration in this case : (1) Whether the applicants or any of them are public servants removable by the Central Government ? (2) Whether the applicants acted or purported to act in the discharge of their official duty? Section 197(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 provides : When any person who is a Judge within the meaning of section 19 of the Indian Penal Code, or when any Magistrate, or when any public servant who is not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of a State Government or the (Central Government), is accused of any offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty, no Court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction - (a) in the case of a person employed in connection with the affairs of the Union, of the Central Government; and (b) in the case of a person employed in connection with the affairs of a State Government.;