KUTUBUDDIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners/accused have preferred this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the proceedings against them in C.C. No. 464 of 1983, on the file of the Court of the Judicial Second Class Magistrate No.2, Tirunelveli.

(2.) THE facts of the case are as follows: The 1st petitioner is the Tahsildar of Madurai and the 2nd Petitioner is a Government Servant being the Office Superintendent of the Civil Supplies Corporation. The 1st petition is the General Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Revenue Officials Association and the 2nd petition is an office -bearer in the said Association. One Visuvasam a Revenue Officer, was suspended from service by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli pending enquiry in some complaint of falsification of accounts and embezzlement of Government money. The petitioners herein who are office -bearers of the Revenue Officials Association passed a resolution and addressed the District Collector by a letter dated 29.1.1983 to withdrew the prosecution launched against the said Visuvasam. In that letter they have stated that the said Visuvasam did not receive any money and that it was the practice of the revenue officials at the lower level to issue advance receipts to the pattadars in the matter of collection of kist. They have further stated that the District Collector had abused the powers vested in him and the order sanctioning the prosecution was illegal and contrary to the instructions issued by the Government. The petitioners have also stated at the end that, in the interest of administration, the Collector will correct the mistake, withdraw the prosecution and restore amity in the revenue administration. On the basis of this letter, the petitioners were charged for offences under Section 189 and 189 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) THUS , the point for decision is whether there is any threat of injury to the public servant on this letter dated 29.1.1983. Section 189 of the Indian Penal Code runs as follows: -189. Whoever holds out any threat of injury to any public servant, or to any person in whom he believes that public servant to be interested, for the purpose of inducing that public servant to do any act, or to forbear or delay to do any act, connected with the exercise of the public functions of such public servant, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extent to two years or with fine, or with both. - It is clear from a reading of this section that in order to constitute an offence under this section, there must be threatening of injury either to a public servant or to any one in whom the public servant is interested. It is of the essence of the offence that the threat should be uttered in order to influence the public servant against whom it is uttered. Therefore, the vital question is, what is a threat? In common parlance, threat is a declaration of an intention to inflict injury, loss or pain on another. Above all, the intention of uttering the threat must be to induce the Government Servant to do or forbear and, therefore, this is necessarily a question of fact depending upon the construction of the words used by the accused.