LAWS(ORI)-2017-10-16

PADMALOCHAN MISHRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On October 30, 2017
Padmalochan Mishra Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner Padmalochan Mishra who was the J.E. (M.W.O) Office, East Coast Railways, Cuttack has challenged the impugned order dated 19.08.2004 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Rural, Cuttack in G.R. Case No. 734 of 2004 in taking cognizance of offences under sections 341 / 294 / 323 of the Indian Penal Code and issuance of process against him. The said case arises out of Cuttack GRPS Case No. 40 of 2004.

(2.) It is stated by Mr. Ajit Kumar Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner that while the petitioner was discharging his official duty in the J.E. Office of M.W.O., East Coast Railways, Cuttack, he received a complaint on 04.06.2004 from one Maguni Swain, an employee of the said office against the informant I. L. William, Senior Clerk of the office regarding demand of illegal money of Rs.1,000/- for supply of store papers. On receipt of such complaint from Maguni Swain, the petitioner being in charge of the office, verified the official documents and came to know about some irregularities and manipulation of the store records and materials by the informant. After knowing the irregularities, the petitioner made correspondence with the higher authorities against the informant for such irregularities and on 29.06.2004 the petitioner also seized the store records of M.W.O. Office, East Coast Railways, Cuttack from the informant I. L. Willaim. Learned counsel further stated that on 30.06.2004 i.e. on the next date of the seizure of the records, the informant entered into the official chamber of the petitioner at about 9 a.m. and requested him to return the seized documents but the petitioner refused to oblige the same. The informant being aggrieved misbehaved with the petitioner and abused him in filthy language and also assaulted the petitioner, for which the petitioner lodged an F.I.R. against the informant before the officer in charge of GRPS East Coast Railways, Cuttack and accordingly GRPS Case No.39 of 2004 was registered on 30.06.2004 under sections 341 / 294 / 323 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is contended that just as a counter blast to the said case, the informant has lodged the F.I.R. against the petitioner indicating therein that the petitioner abused him in filthy language and slapped him when he asked him to make a statement of records taken over and sign on it. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the submission of charge sheet and impugned order of taking cognizance is vitiated in the eye of law as the criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide and is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the petitioner due to official dispute. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is a public servant and the offence alleged to have been committed in the discharge of his official duty and therefore, the learned Magistrate should not have taken cognizance of the offences and issued process against the petitioner without any valid sanction from the Government as required under section 197 of Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the ingredients of the offences are not attracted and unless this Court invokes its inherent power under section 482 of Cr.P.C. and quash the impugned order, the petitioner will be seriously prejudiced.

(3.) After perusing the documents annexed to the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. and the first information report, it appears that there was official dispute between the petitioner and the informant and there was some allegation against the informant regarding manipulation of store records and materials and in that connection the relevant documents have been seized by the petitioner which is apparent from Annexure-3 dated 29.06.2004. Further materials available on record indicates that on 30.06.2004 on the first information report submitted by the petitioner against the informant, GRPS Case No. 39 of 2004 was registered under section 341 / 294 / 323 of the Indian Penal Code and it is alleged that the informant misbehaved and manhandled the petitioner inside the office chamber of the petitioner. The F.I.R. which was lodged by the informant in the case was subsequent to that and the informant stated that he asked for a statement of the records taken over and sign on it for which the petitioner abused him in unparliamentary language and slapped him and also chased him to assault. No doubt it is alleged that during performance of the official duty, the petitioner has committed certain excesses but even then also in view of the settled position of law, sanction is necessary. It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa through Kumar Raghvendra Singh and Ors. -Vrs.- Ganesh Chandra Jew reported in (2004) 28 Orissa Criminal Reports 94 as follows:-