REDDY SRINIVASA RAO Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both sides agree for taking up the Criminal Petition for hearing.

(2.) This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of proceedings in C.C.No. 38 of 1999 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Amudalavalasa in which the petitioner is accused of offences under Sections 341, 323, 506 (2), 500 read with Section 511, IPC. The facts as narrated in the complaint filed by the 2nd respondent herein may be noticed briefly: On 16-1-1999 some persons were taken to the Police Station in connection with some allegations against them. The complainant came to know about the alleged illegal detention of those persons namely Mamidi Srinivas Rao and others. According to the complainant those persons were innocent and were falsely implicated. Earlier, the complainant telephoned to the concerned Police Officer at the police station to secure release of the said persons, as there was no response to his telephone call the complainant went to the police station. The accused, who is the Sub-Inspector of Police, was present in the police station. On seeing the arrival of the complainant he became enraged and started shouting at the complainant with an intention to cause harm to the reputation of the complainant in the public view. It is stated that the accused- officer without receiving the representation of the complainant scolded the workers of the Congress party who were said to have been detained. In the meanwhile some persdns gathered at the police station hearing the shouting of the accused. On seeing this, the complainant went out of the police station and requested them to stay outside. It appears that the accused took some photographs with his camera and forcibly took the complainant inside the police station and scolded and insulted him using defamatory language and wrongfully confined him for more than two hours. In the meanwhile, the gathering outside demanded the release of the complainant and others detained in the police station. Seeing this, the accused pushed the complainant resulting in injuries on his back and his right hand ring finger. It is alleged that the complainant was also beaten by the accused with his hand stick.

(3.) The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the incident is alleged to have occurred within the premises of police station where the petitioner- accused was engaged in his official duties and as such the prosecution, without sanction of the competent authorities, is barred under Section 197, Cr.P.C. The contention of the learned Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, is that though the incident occurred in the police station where the petitioner-accused might have been attending to some official work but abusing the complainant and pushing him and beating him with a stick are no part of the duties of the accused and as such the protection under Section 197, Cr.P.C. is not available to the acts alleged against the petitioner by the complainant in this case.