- (1.) THIS is an application for quashing the order dated 22.6.2007 passed by S.D.J.M., Dhanbad in C.P. Case No. 526 of 2000 whereby and whereunder cognizance under section 323, 342, 193 read with section 34 of the IPC has been taken against the petitioners.
(2.) IT is submitted by the petitioners that in the complaint petition it is alleged that the petitioners had obtained signature of complainant on seizure list. It is further submitted that the petitioners are police officers and they have obtained the signature of complainant, who is accused of Dhansar P. S. Case No. 274 of 2000, in course of investigation of the said case. Thus protection under section 197 of the Cr.P.C. is available to the petitioners. It is submitted that since the cognizance has been taken without obtaining the sanction of State Government, therefore, the impugned order is illegal and cannot be sustained by this Court. Learned Additional P.P. while opposing the aforesaid submission had submitted that section 197 of the Cr.P.C. have no application in the instant case, because the petitioners had wrongfully detained the complainant and took his signature with a view to fabricate false evidence. It is also alleged that while doing so petitioners also assaulted the complainant, which is not the official duty of the petitioners. Hence the court below had rightly come to the conclusion that no sanction is required.
(3.) HAVING heard the submission, I have gone through the record of the case. Sub Section (1) of Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as follows: - 197. Prosecution of Judges and public servants. - (1) When any person who is or was a Judge or Magistrate or a public servant not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the 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 who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of the Union, of the Central Government: (b) in the case of a person who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of a State, of the State Government: [Provided that where the alleged offence was committed by a person referred to in clause (b) during the period while a Proclamation issued under clause (1) of Article 356 of the Constitution was in force in a State, clause (b) will apply as if for the expression " State Government" occurring therein, the expression " Central Government" were substituted] ¦ ¦ ¦. ;