ASHOK RANGSHAHI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, who is a Sub Inspector of Police, has been convicted under section 161 IPC and sentenced to R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00, in default to suffer S.I. for three months. He is also convicted under section 5(1) (d) read with section 5 clause 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo RI. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00, in default to suffer S.I. for three months with the direction that the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) The preliminary objection raised by the learned counsel for the appellant basing on a copy of the Gazette notification dated 29/3/1978 which is filed in the appeal, is that the appellant having been appointed by the Inspector General of Police and the Additional Inspector General of Police the sanction for prosecution issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police is not a valid sanction contemplated under section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and consequently the conviction recorded against the appellant is vitiated.

(3.) Section 197 clause (1) lays down that when a public servant is accused of any offence alleged to have been committed by him while purporting, to act in the discharge of his official duty, no court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction by the competent authority. The learned third Additional Session Judge, Bilaspur who tried the appellant evidently relied upon the evidence of PW 3 who deposed that the Dy. Inspector General of Police is the appointing authority and that the sanction in this case was given by the Dy. Inspector General of Police.