V K MOHAN Vs. ARUN DATTATRAYA BHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS arises out of a summons issued by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 23rd Court Esplande Bombay against the petitioner under section 420, 477-A of the IPC. Before the learned Magistrate first respondent has filed a complaint against the petitioner who was at the relevant time General Manager, Indian Navy, Colaba, Bombay alleging various malpractices in the management of the canteen by the petitioner. The said complaint was filed on 27th July 1987. On receipt of the complaint the learned Magistrate by his order dated 26-8-87 referred the matter to the police for investigation under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. After detailed investigation by the police all the charges levelled against the petitioner was found to be unsubstantiated by the police. The police made that report on 7-4-1988. Nevertheless, a strange procedure has been adopted by the Magistrate that on 12-9-90 the complainant was examined and recorded his statement and issued the impugned process against the petitioner.

(2.) THE learned counsel Mrs. Teja Katdare submits that the procedure adopted by the Magistrate was quite irregular. She also submits that the petitioner being a public servant the sanction required under sec.197 of the Cr.P.C. was not taken before the petitioner was prosecuted. The learned counsel also submits that first respondent has no authority to prosecute the petitioner and on this ground also the Magistrate has committed illegality in issuing summons to the petitioner.

(3.) I also find substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that no sanction has been obtained as envisaged under section 197 of the Cr.P.C. The complainant has not produced any authority authorizing him to file a complaint before the Magistrate. On these grounds I am satisfied that the Magistrate has acted illegally and erroneously in issuing summons against the petitioner.