S.D.BAJAJ,J - (1.) HEARD . Around 9.05 p.m. on 19.10.1987 Central Police Station, Chandigarh, was informed on telephone, allegedly received from the Control Room that certain undesirables resembling terrorists were present in House No. 35, Sector 10, Chandigarh Police party was immediately despatched thereto in search of them in terms of D.D.R. No. 57 recorded in Police Station aforesaid on 19.10.1987.
(2.) ON arrival at House No. 35, Sector 10, Chandigarh the police found that the undesirables were concealing their presence on the first floor of the house and the only approach there it could be from around floor and first floor of adjoining House No. 35, Sector 10, Chandigarh, because the occupant of the ground floor of House No. 35, Sector 10, Chandigarh had blocked the passage from his side by placing the Holy Granth in the staircase and thereby converting it into a place of religious worship. Keeping in view urgency and to avoid controversy, the police are alleged to have approached the complainant-respondent R.S. Dass, a retired I.A.S. Officer, who is now practising as an advocate of this Court, (sic). The respondent indulged in legal niceties and wanted to engross the police in legal quibbles. The police in turn effected a forcible entry via his tenancy premises, apprehended the naughy boys, and took legal action against them which culminated in their conviction. After apprehending the naughty boys' while taking them to the police station in their own van, the police also alleged to have taken respondent along thereto as well but did not in their wisdom proceed against him and set him at liberty around 11.00 p.m., i.e., nearly two hours after apprehension. D.D.R. No. 64 was recorded in Police Station Central, Chandigarh, to this effect around 12.25 a.m. on 20.10.1987. Respondent R.S. Dass filed against the three petitioners a complainant under Sections 342/352/448, all read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, wherein the learned trial Court made the summoning order. The present petitioners moved therein an application for dropping the proceedings against them on the ground that sanction in terms of Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 had not been obtained by the respondent before prosecuting them. Learned trial Court, however dismissed the application on 8.8.1988. While dismissing it, learned trial Court observed as follows :- "On which complaint the accused had raided the house of the complainant ? Whether on the basis of said complaint any D.D.R. or F.I.R. was also lodged ? Whether the accused persons had proceeded to raid the house after making entries in the roznamcha ? Record altogether is silent about these questions. In absence of this record the acts attributed to the accused can by no stretch of imagination be termed as having been done in discharge of their official duties. There is no nexus between the acts complained of and their official duties. Hence, to my mind, no sanction under Section 197, Criminal Procedure Code, in the present case is required. In view of this, the application under Section 197, Criminal Procedure Code, stands disposed of. Let case be fixed for production of pre-charge evidence of the complainant." Copies of D.D.R. No. 57 dated 19.10.1987 and No. 64 dated 20.10.1987 have since been placed on record. Photostat copy of Notification No. 12291-III(I)-84/3157 dated 10.2.1984 issued by the Home Department of Union Territory of Chandigarh has also been placed on record. It would thus appear from the contents of these documents that the petitioners had gone to House No. 35, Sector 10, Chandigarh, in search of the naughty boys with reference to D.D.R. No. 57 dated 19.10.1987 and effected their entry to first floor of House No. 35, Sector 10 aforesaid from the house occupied by the respondent in the discharge of their official duties on account of difficult situation allegedly created by the respondent and ultimately did not take any action against the respondent for the obstruction admittedly made by him in the performance of their duties presumably on account of his high sounding I.A.S. retiree status and being a member of the Local High Court Bar Association.
(3.) CHANDIGARH is duly notified as "Disturbed Area" and, therefore, for apprehension of undesirables allegedly resembling terrorists (their description given out in D.D.R. No. 57 dated 19.10.1987), the petitioners could reasonably ask for ingress from respondent's house and even effect a forcible entry through it on the respondent's refusal to allow them an entry therefrom. The text and tenor of the complaint filed by the respondent also indicates that it has been filed basically protect the naughty boys; muchless for the protection of enforcement of any legal rights allegedly vested in the respondent himself.;