2015 (4) TMI 1065 - SC - Indian Laws

Cognizance of the alleged offence - whether the learned Magistrate could not have taken cognizance of the alleged offence and issued process to the appellant without sanction from the State Government under Section 197 of CrPC, and that on that sole ground, the High Court should have quashed the proceedings? - Held that - As whole allegation is on police excess in connection with the investigation of a criminal case. The said offensive conduct is reasonably connected with the performance of the official duty of the appellant. Therefore, the learned Magistrate could not have taken cognizance of the case without the previous sanction of the State Government. The High Court missed this crucial point in the impugned order. The appeal is hence allowed. The impugned order by the High Court is set aside, so also, the proceedings initiated by the Civil Judge (Jr.Div) and JMFC at Chikkanayakanahalli, Karnataka in C.C. No. 74/2009 taking cognizance and issuing process to the appellant. It is made clear that our judgment is only on the issue of sanction and we have not considered the matter on merits and that this judgment shall not stand in the way of respondent approaching the State Government for sanction under Section 197 of CrPC. In case such sanction is obtained and the same is produced before the learned Magistrate, the Magistrate may proceed further in the case in accordance with the law.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the learned Magistrate could take cognizance of the alleged offence and issue process without sanction under Section 197 of CrPC.
2. Whether the High Court erred in declining the appellant's plea to quash the proceedings based on the lack of sanction.
3. Whether the alleged police excess during investigation requires sanction for prosecution.

Issue 1:
The appellant contended that the learned Magistrate could not have taken cognizance of the alleged offence and issued process without sanction under Section 197 of CrPC. The appellant argued that the alleged conduct, involving exceeding power during investigation and assaulting the respondent to extract information, was connected to the discharge of official duty. It was emphasized that under Section 197 of CrPC, if a government servant is accused of an offence committed while acting in discharge of official duty, previous sanction is necessary. The appellant's plea was based on the argument that the High Court should have quashed the proceedings due to the lack of sanction.

Issue 2:
The High Court's decision to decline the appellant's plea under Section 482 of CrPC was based on the facts and reasons presented in the impugned order. The court noted that the complaint, sworn statement of the complainant, and witnesses indicated that the complainant was detained and coerced to confess involvement in a murder. The High Court emphasized that at the stage of considering prima facie case for issuing summons, the defense of the accused should not be entertained. The appellant's contention that the case should be quashed due to lack of sanction was not accepted by the High Court, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.

Issue 3:
The Supreme Court analyzed the requirement of sanction for prosecution in cases of alleged police excess during investigation. Referring to previous judgments, the court highlighted that protection under Section 197 of CrPC is to safeguard public servants against vexatious criminal proceedings related to acts done in discharge of official duties. The court emphasized that the alleged act must be reasonably connected to official duty to invoke the protection of Section 197. In the present case, the appellant's actions during investigation were found to be integrally connected to official duty, necessitating previous sanction for prosecution. The court held that the learned Magistrate erred in taking cognizance without the State Government's sanction, and allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and proceedings initiated by the lower court.

This detailed analysis of the legal judgment covers the issues involved in the case comprehensively, addressing the appellant's arguments, the High Court's decision, and the Supreme Court's findings regarding the requirement of sanction under Section 197 of CrPC in cases involving alleged police excess during investigation.