D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) PETITIONERS have prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings initiated against them, pending in the Court of Shri A.K. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad vide C.P. Case No. 574 of 1996 including the Order of cognizance dated 6th February, 1997, whereby the learned Court below took cognizance, for the offences under Sections 341/363 IPC against the Petitioners.
(2.) THE main ground of attack against the impugned Order passed by the Trial Court and the continuance of the proceedings against the Petitioners is that the Order of cognizance was passed in a mechanical way, without application of judicial mind, by the Magistrate and further, that even on the basis of the allegations in the FIR, no cognizance for the offences could be taken against the Petitioners without prior sanction for prosecution under the provisions of Sec. 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as because the Petitioners are Government employees and Public Servants. Further, plea has been taken on the ground that while, no specific overt act of violence has been attributed against the Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, the allegations and case of the prosecution against the Petitioner Nos. 3, 4 and 5 suggests that they had visited the place of occurrence in the discharge of their official duties and since, the Petitioner Nos. 3, 4 and 5 belong to the Railway Protection Force, they are entitled to the benefit of the protection under the provisions of the Railway Protection Force Act in respect of any of their acts and deeds, done in discharge of their official duties and therefore, they cannot be made liable for any offence at all, much less the offence under Sec. 341 and 363 of IPC for which they have been called upon by the Trial Court to face the trial. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Counsel for the opposite parties.
(3.) FOR better appreciation of the grounds advanced, reference in brief to the facts of the case may be made. The case against the Petitioners was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the Opposite Party No. 2 in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.The allegations in the complaint petition are that, in the evening of 8th August, 1996, the Complainant/Opposite Party No. 2, a practicing Advocate of the Dhanbad Civil Court and a daily passenger holding a seasonal ticket of the Eastern Railway, Dhanbad for travelling between Dhanbad and Katras, came to Platform No. 6 at the Dhanbad Railway Station to board a passenger train, which was scheduled for departure at 5 p.m. on the alleged date of occurrence. While, he alongwith his friends were sitting in a compartment, the Accused persons, namely, the Petitioner Nos. 3 to 5 arrived at the Platform alongwith, armed guards for checking ticket less travellers. Feeling annoyed, over the delay caused in the departure of the train, the Complainant and other passengers requested the Accused persons to conduct their checking in course of the travel and should not delay the departure of the train. A protest was also made by the Complainant and other passengers, to take action against the anti -social elements, who were carrying coal, iron and other stolen materials in the same train. It is alleged that, the Petitioners reacted to the protest and a hot discussion between the passengers and the Accused persons ensued. At that moment, the Accused - Petitioner No. 3, A.K. Singh, who was the commandant of the R.P.S.F. ordered the armed guards of the R.P.S.F. for resorting to lathi charge, whereupon, the Assistant Commandant, K.D. Banerjee (Petitioner No. 4) and the other Constables, namely, Accused Nos. 5 and 6 began assaulting the Complainant and the passengers.The Complainant lodged a complaint with the senior D.C.M., namely, Vishnu Kumar, (Petitioner No. 1) and with the D.C.M., namely, Nalni Parshuramaka (Petitioner No. 2), who instead of extending protection to the Complainant and the passengers, took no action whatsoever in the matter.;