Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Dr. Kakasaheb Adinath Dole, a Sub-Divisional Police Officer, challenged the order issuing process against him in Regular Criminal Complaint Case No.75/2011 under Section 482 CrPC. The complaint was filed by non-applicant No.1, Prashant Mahadeorao Nandurkar, alleging an offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Prevention of Atrocities to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989. The facts reveal that on 13-3-2011, the complainant lodged a report alleging caste-based abuse by certain persons. The applicant was directed to investigate as the regular officer was on leave. On 24-3-2011, the applicant visited the college and directed the complainant to remain present for recording a supplementary statement, which was recorded on 30-3-2011. The complainant later issued a letter on 13-4-2011 expressing dissatisfaction. The Magistrate took cognizance and issued process against the applicant. The High Court examined whether the act of recording a supplementary statement was part of the applicant's official duty as a police officer. The court held that the investigation of a crime is a statutory duty under the CrPC, and recording statements is an integral part of that duty. Therefore, the alleged act of insult, if any, was in discharge of official duty. Consequently, prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC was mandatory before taking cognizance. Since no such sanction was obtained, the order issuing process was quashed. The court also noted that the complaint did not prima facie satisfy the ingredients of Section 3(1)(x) as the alleged insult was not in public view. The application was allowed, and the proceedings against the applicant were quashed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 197 CrPC - Public Servant - Alleged offence under Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act committed by police officer during investigation - Held that the act of recording supplementary statement is part of official duty, and without sanction under Section 197 CrPC, the order issuing process is not sustainable (Paras 8-12). B) Prevention of Atrocities Act - Offence under Section 3(1)(x) - Ingredients - Intentional Insult in Public View - Alleged abuse in college office during investigation - Held that the complaint did not prima facie establish that the insult was in public view or that the act was not in discharge of official duty (Paras 5-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order issuing process against a police officer for an offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act is sustainable without prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC when the alleged act was done during investigation.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the application and quashed the order issuing process and all proceedings in Regular Criminal Complaint Case No.75/2011 against the applicant.
Law Points
- Sanction under Section 197 CrPC is mandatory for prosecution of public servant for acts done in discharge of official duty
- Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act requires intentional insult in public view
- Investigation by police officer is official duty requiring sanction
