9911796707
TMI Blog1948 (10) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n or about the 19th day of September, 1945, in the Town of Calcutta being a public servant to wit, a Railway servant and an inspector in the office of the Regional Controller of Priorities accepted from one Sohanlal a gratification other than your legal remuneration to wit, the sum of ₹ 500 only as a motive or reward for showing favour to the said Sohanlal in the exercise of your official functions relating to an application by the said Sohanlal for being allowed two waggons, one from Allahabad and another from Benares and thereby you the said Phanindra Chandra Neogy committed an offence punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and within my cognizance. 3. The single ground upon which the petition for special leave to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an act. The test may well be, whether the public servant, if challenged, can reasonably claim that what he does, he does in virtue of his office. 5. Applying this reasoning to the case of Gill, a public servant, who had been charged together with one, Lahiri, with being a party to a criminal conspiracy to cheat the Government, whereby offences under Section 120B read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code were alleged to have been committed, and had also been charged with offences under Section 161 of the Code, their Lordships held that no sanction under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code was necessary. 6. In face of this judgment the present appeal appeared to have little chance of success. It was nevertheless argued full ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o not think it necessary to repeat what was said there. Learned counsel for the appellant in the present case laid stress upon what he described as a long line of authority in favour of the view that, where the offence charged is an act which would not be an offence unless committed by a public servant, sanction under Section 197 is necessary. Their Lordships without scrutinising the authorities, which do not appear entirely to support this view, would observe that it is the words of Section 197 as amended in 1923 and nothing else that must be considered, and that they can see no justification for reading the section as if the words which under the Criminal Procedure Code is an offence only if committed by a public servant were inserted i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
