HARJIVAN KESHAVLAL PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Application under sec. 397 of the code of criminal procedure,1973, arises out of order dated 29th October,2007, of learned 2nd Fast Track Judge, Junagadh, below Ex.3 application in Sessions case No.65 of 2006, By said order, learned judge dismissed the application of the present applicant-accused, praying for his discharge. The discharge was prayed for on the ground that before prosecuting the applicant, who was Sub-Inspector of Police, previous sanction of the state government was necessary under sec.197 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the code')

(2.) IN the said FIR No. I-82/87, commission of cognizable offences under section 325 and sec.465 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, were alleged against the applicant who at the relevant time, was working as Police Sub Inspector at Keshod Police station. The complainant in his complaint stated that he had 10 Bigas of land at village Kareni where he was doing agricultural work and was staying with his wife, three sons and one daughter. On the date of incident, PSI Shri Patel, the applicant herein, accompanied by another policeman Visaji and six other police personnel came in a police jeep at his house at around 3 a.m. in the night. They inquired whether his son Valabhai was present. It was stated that at that time, he was sleeping on the coat in Varandah of the house, and the other members of family were sleeping inside. They all woke up and came out. PSI Shri Patel and complainant's son Karsan had an altercation which turned violent. He did not know who suffered what injuries. The complainant stated that however he suffered the axe blow it was further stated that the axe blow night have been given by the applicant. There was moonlight. Complainant did not know as to whether other persons suffered injury but he was taken to hospital. According to the complainant, in the last elections, a complaint was filed against his son Vala Raja who was arrested in that connection. In the above complainant, the names of present applicant and police constable Visaji were mentioned as accused. Other persons accompanying were not named. The complaint was thus to the effect that the applicant- PSI with other police personnel had come to arrest Vala Raja at the house of the complainant and in course of altercation, as stated above, accused No. 1 gave axe blow to the complainant.

(3.) THE only issue to be addressed in the present Revision application is whether in the facts of the case, sanction under section 197 of the Code was necessary. In order to appreciate the controversy and the contentions raised in the context, it is useful reproduce the provisions of section 197 of Code.