PRASANTA KUMAR ROUT Vs. GOURAHARI SETHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner nos.1 & 2, who were working as Tahasildar and Record Keeper in Kanika Tahasil respectively, have challenged the order dated 14.02.2003 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Pattamundai in I.C.C. Case No.4 of 2003 taking cognizance under Sections 323/294/34 IPC and U/S 3 of P.A. Act for S.C. & S.T. Act against them.

(2.) The petitioners assail the impugned order dated 14.02.2003 on two counts, namely, at the time of taking cognizance by the learned J.M.F.C. there was no previous sanction of the State Government as required under Section 197 Cr.P.C. and that the duty with regard to issuance of certificate and other related dues had not been assigned to petitioner no.1 rather the same was given to Mr. Surendra Nath Rout, O.A.S, who was working as Addl. Tahasildar and so far as petitioner no.2 is concerned, on the date of alleged occurrence he was not present in the office and had been to the Office of the Deputy Director of Printing Stationary and Publication, Orissa vide letter No.223 dated 02.04.2003 to receive the diary and calendar for the year 2003 pursuant to order No.113 dated 04.01.2003 of petitioner no.1. Therefore, frivolous allegations have been made against opposite party no.2 for which he seeks for quashing of the impugned order dated 14.02.2003 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Pattamundai in I.C.C. Case No.4 of 2003.

(3.) The short fact of the case is that on 06.01.2003 the opposite party went to the Office of the petitioner no.1, i.e. Tahasildar, Kanika to enquire about the grant of valuation certificate of his land which he had applied on 11.11.2002. When he requested Petitioner no.1 to issue the aforesaid certificate as it was urgent in nature, petitioner no.1 got angry and scolded him. Petitioner no.2 also gave him a neck push on the direction of petitioner no.1. Due to such assault and illegal act of the petitioners, the opposite party-complainant lost his social prestige and filed the complaint case.