P KUNHIRAMAN NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition by the first accused in C. C. 1046 of 1964 to revise the order of the Sub Magistrate, Tirur rejecting the preliminary objection raised by him that he being the president of the Vallikunnu Panchayat the charge laid against him under S.323 and 324 I.P.C. by the Sub Inspector of Police, Tirurangadi cannot be taken cognisance of without the requisite sanction of the Government as provided in S.122 of the Kerala Panchayats Act. S.122 is in the following terms:--

(2.) In order that the section might apply it must be held that the act done bears such a relation to the official duties of the person concerned that he can lay a reasonable and not merely a pretended or fanciful claim that the act complained of was done by him in the course of the performance of his official duties. S.122 cannot be invoked merely because it is his official status which furnished him an occasion or the opportunity for the commission of the offence complained of. The question of necessity of sanction has to be decided on the materials available on record at the time cognisance is taken. Even though the complaint or the charge sheet may not disclose that the act constituting the offence was done or purported to be done in the discharge of official duty, facts subsequently coming to light in the course of the enquiry when the prosecution evidence is adduced may establish the necessity for sanction. As was held in Matajog Dobey & others v. Bhari ( AIR 1956 SC 44 ) whether sanction is necessary or not may have to be determined from stage to stage. The mere fact that the petitioner is the Panchayat President would not be itself be sufficient to bring the case within the inhibition of S.122.