K N SHUKLA Vs. NAVNIT LAL MANILAL BHATT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is brought, by special leave, from the judgment of the High Court of Gujarat dated July 29, 1964 in Criminal Revision No. 385 of 1964.

(2.) On March 14,1961 respondent No. 1 filed a complaint against the appellant who was of ficiating in the post of Divisional Operating Superintendent, Western Railway, Rajkot. It was alleged in the complaint that the appellant had committed of fences under Secs.. 166 and 182, Indian Penal Code. The appellant objected before the trying Magistrate that the complaint under sec. 182, Indian Penal Code by a private person was barred under sec. 195(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and that as the alleged acts of the appellant were said to be done in his of ficial capacity and in discharge of his of ficial duty and as the appellant was a public servant not removable from his of fice save with the sanction of the Central Government, the complaint was not maintainable in the absence of sanction of Central Government under sec. 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Magistrate was not competent to take cognizance of the of fences under Secs.. 166 and 167, Indian Penal Code. The objections were overruled by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mehsana by his order dated October 14, 1961. The appellant took the matter in revision to the Sessions Judge of Mehsana who referred the matter to the High Court on January 31, 1962. In Criminal Reference No. 14 of 1962 the High Court ordered that the complaint under sec. 182, Indian Penal Code was bad being in contravention of the provisions of sec. 195, Criminal Procedure Code, but the High Court directed the trial court to decide in the first instance whether the appellant was not removable from his of fice save with the sanction of the Central Government. Thereafter, the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mehsana, by his order dated February 28, 1963, held that the appellant was not removable from his of fice save with the sanction of the Central Government and the complaint should be rejected because there was no sanction granted under sec. 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The first respondent preferred a revision petition before the Sessions Judge of Mehsana who dismissed it and confirmed the order of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mehsana. The first respondent took the matter in revision to the High Court in Criminal Revision No., 385 of 1963., By its order dated July 29, 1964 the High Court held that the appellant being an of ficiating Class I of ficer was removable by the Railway Board and no sanction of Central Government was necessary to prosecute the appellant as contemplated by sec. 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The High Court accordingly directed that the case under Secs.. 166 and 167, Indian Penal Code should proceed against the appellant.

(3.) The question presented for determination in this appeal is whether the appellant was, at the date of complaint i. e., March 14, 1961, a public servant "who was not removable from his of fice save by or with the sanction of the Central Government" within the meaning of sec. 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code and, therefore, whether sanction of Central Government was necessary for prosecuting the appellant of the of fence under Secs.. 166 and 167 of the Indian Penal Code.