SUDHIR KUMAR SATPATHY Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioner being aggrieved of the order dtd. 24/3/2014 passed in G.R. Case No.1516 of 2013 by the learned S.D.J.M., Angul corresponding to Jarapada P.S. Case No.117 of 2013 on the grounds inter alia that the same is not tenable in law in absence of sanction under Sec. 197 Cr.P.C.

(2.) In fact, on submission of enquiry report by the informant in connection with Jarapada P.S. U.D. Case No.1 of 2013, Jarapada P.S. Case No.117(8) dtd. 24/8/2013 was registered under Ss. 342 read with 34 IPC. It was in connection with the death of the deceased, who was in police lock-up. As per the prosecution case, on 31/12/2012 in the morning hours, the deceased said to have been assaulted as the complainant who had been to Jarapada PS had lodged a written report against him with the allegation of assault and damage caused to a vehicle, in course of which, an enquiry was conducted by the petitioner, who was posted at the PS as the ASI of police. It is alleged that the deceased was kept inside the PS lock-up till the next day and such detention was without any case being registered against him and during that time, he committed suicide on 1/1/2023 in the afternoon. In fact, according to the FIR, the deceased tied his neck with wearing shirt and hanged himself inside the PS hazat and though his body was removed and was shirted to DHH, Angul but was declared dead and in that connection, Jarapada P.S. U.D. Case No.1 of 2013 was registered. Under the above circumstances, since the deceased was wrongly detained at the PS, in view of the enquiry held by the informant, Jarapada P.S. Case No.117 (8) was registered after completion of investigation and the petitioner and another accused, namely, IIC of the PS were chargesheeted vide C.S. No.18th dtd. 24/4/2022, consequent upon which, the learned court below took cognizance of the alleged offence and summoned them. The said order of cognizance vide Annexure-2 is under challenge on the solitary ground that the petitioner was on duty and he was not directly responsible for the alleged detention of the deceased which was on the orders of the other accused, namely, IIC of the PS and sanction under Sec. 197 Cr.P.C. was necessary which has not been obtained at the time of submission of chargesheet and thereafter, while cognizance of the offence vide Annexure-2.

(3.) Heard Mr. Acharya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Praharaj, learned SC and Mr. Samantaray, learned counsel for the informant.