Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bhikkanrao T. Baviskar, was the Chief Officer of Municipal Council, Nandurbar. A bailiff from the Court of Civil Judge Senior Division, Nandurbar, visited his office to serve summons and status-quo orders in civil suits restraining demolition of premises. The petitioner refused to accept the summons and obstructed the bailiff from affixing them on the conspicuous part of the premises as per Order V Rule 27 CPC. Consequently, a complaint was filed under Section 173 IPC for obstructing a public servant. The Judicial Magistrate First Class issued process, rejecting the petitioner's application for protection under Section 197 CrPC, holding that the obstruction was not part of official duties. The petitioner's criminal revision was initially allowed with directions for fresh consideration, but the Magistrate again rejected the application. The Sessions Judge dismissed the subsequent revision. The High Court upheld these orders, holding that the act of obstructing service of summons is not an act done in discharge of official duties, and thus no sanction under Section 197 CrPC is required. The petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Obstruction of Public Servant - Section 173 IPC - Refusal to Accept Summons - The petitioner, a Chief Officer, refused to accept summons and obstructed the bailiff from affixing them on the premises. The court held that such conduct does not form part of official duties and is not protected under Section 197 CrPC. (Paras 1-6)
B) Criminal Procedure - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 197 CrPC - Official Duty - The court held that the act of obstructing service of summons is not an act done in discharge of official duties, and therefore, no prior sanction is required for prosecution under Section 173 IPC. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the act of a Chief Officer in refusing to accept summons and obstructing the bailiff from affixing the same constitutes an act done in discharge of official duties, thereby requiring prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the criminal writ petition, upholding the orders of the courts below that the petitioner's conduct did not form part of official duties and no sanction under Section 197 CrPC was required.
Law Points
- Section 173 IPC
- obstruction of public servant
- discharge of official duties
- Section 197 CrPC
- sanction for prosecution
- Order V Rule 27 CPC
Case Details
Criminal Writ Petition No. 993 of 2024
Mr. Girish V. Wani h/f. Mr. Mangesh G. Patil – Advocate for Petitioner, Mr. V.M. Chate – APP for Respondent No.1, State, Mr. Suraj P. Tiwari – Advocate for Respondent No.2
The State of Maharashtra, Ravindra Sitaram Khanderay
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging the order of Sessions Judge dismissing revision and upholding issuance of process under Section 173 IPC.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of process and dismissal of complaint for want of sanction under Section 197 CrPC.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was accused of obstructing a bailiff from serving summons and affixing them, leading to complaint under Section 173 IPC.
Previous Decisions
Judicial Magistrate First Class rejected application for protection under Section 197 CrPC; Criminal Revision No.16/2022 was allowed with directions for fresh consideration; after fresh consideration, Magistrate again rejected application; Criminal Revision Application No.5/2023 was dismissed by Sessions Judge.
Issues
Whether the act of refusing to accept summons and obstructing affixation by a Chief Officer is an act done in discharge of official duties?
Whether prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC is required for prosecution under Section 173 IPC in such circumstances?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the act was part of official duties and required sanction under Section 197 CrPC.
Respondent/State argued that obstruction of service of summons is not an official duty and no sanction is required.
Ratio Decidendi
The act of obstructing a bailiff from serving summons or affixing them on the premises is not an act done in discharge of official duties, and therefore, no prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC is required for prosecution under Section 173 IPC.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner has assailed the order rendered by the Sessions Judge, Nandurbar, in Criminal Revision Application No.5/2023, dismissing the revision, endorsing the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nandurbar, issuing process for the offence punishable under Section 173 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nandurbar, considering the conduct of the petitioner and observing that such conduct does not form part of official duties issued process against the petitioner.
Procedural History
Complaint filed by bailiff under Section 173 IPC. JMFC issued process. Petitioner applied for discharge under Section 197 CrPC, rejected. Criminal Revision No.16/2022 allowed with directions for fresh consideration. JMFC again rejected application. Criminal Revision Application No.5/2023 dismissed by Sessions Judge. Petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 993 of 2024 before High Court, which was dismissed.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 173
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 197
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order V Rule 27
