Case Note & Summary
The case involves a criminal revision application filed by the accused, a Police Inspector, against an order of the Special Judge, Panaji, dated 21.6.2006, which overruled his objections to the framing of charge. The complainant, a Sub Divisional Magistrate belonging to a Scheduled Caste (Chambhar), alleged that the accused used abusive language and threatened him at the police station, constituting an offence under Section 3(2)(vii) read with Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The accused was committed for trial by the JMFC on 20.12.2000. At the stage of framing of charge, the accused raised two objections: first, that he was entitled to protection under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, requiring prior sanction for prosecution as the alleged acts were in discharge of official duty; and second, that the complaint was not filed in accordance with an earlier order dated 8.11.2000 of the Sessions Judge. The Special Judge overruled both objections. The High Court, after hearing arguments, held that the acts of the accused were intimately connected with his official duty as a police officer, and therefore sanction under Section 197 CrPC was mandatory. The court also found that the complaint was not filed by a competent authority as required under Section 9 of the SC/ST Act. Consequently, the court allowed the revision, set aside the impugned order, and quashed the charge against the accused.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 197 CrPC - Protection of Public Servants - The accused, a Police Inspector, sought protection under Section 197 CrPC alleging that the alleged acts were in discharge of official duty. The court held that the acts of the accused, including using abusive language and threatening the complainant, were intimately connected with his official duty as a police officer, and therefore sanction under Section 197 CrPC was mandatory before taking cognizance. (Paras 6-10) B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - Complaint Filing - Section 9 of the Act - The second objection was that the complaint was not filed in accordance with the earlier order dated 8.11.2000 of the Sessions Judge. The court held that the complaint was not filed by a competent authority as required under Section 9 of the Act, and thus the proceedings were vitiated. (Paras 6, 11-12) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Framing of Charge - Prima Facie Case - The court examined whether there was sufficient material to frame a charge under Section 3(2)(vii) read with Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act. The court found that the allegations did not make out a prima facie case for the offence, as the incident occurred in a private setting and not in public view. (Paras 13-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the accused, a Police Inspector, is entitled to protection under Section 197 CrPC requiring sanction for prosecution, and whether the complaint was filed in accordance with the earlier order of the Sessions Judge.
Final Decision
The revision is allowed. The impugned order dated 21.6.2006 of the learned Special Judge, Panaji is set aside. The charge against the accused is quashed.
Law Points
- Sanction under Section 197 CrPC is mandatory for prosecution of public servants for acts done in discharge of official duty
- Complaint under SC/ST Act must be filed by a competent authority as per Section 9 of the Act
- Framing of charge requires prima facie case
