LALITMOHAN PANIGRABI AND ORS. Vs. MAYADHAR SAMARATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER No. 1 was the Officer -in -charge of Kantabanji Police Station and Petitioners 2 and 3 were Constables in the year 1985 they have challenged the order passed by the learned Judicia] Magistrate, Kantabanji, taking Cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 342, I. P. C, against them.

(2.) FACTS -The opposite party was implicated in a case under Section 47 (f) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act. A warrant of arrest was issued against him in connection with that case and was sent to the Officer -in -charge of Kantabanji Police station for execution, In execution of the warrant, the opposite party was arrested on 1 -9 -1985 and was produced in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate on the next day .

(3.) MR . D. K. Misra, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners urged that the arrest was in discharge of their official duties in accordance with the warrant of arrest and even though it might have been wrong yet, without obtaining sanction for the prosecution under Section 197, Cr.P. C. from the government or the appropriate authority cognisance of the offence should not have been taken. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance on Sarat alias Saroj Kumar Sahu and 2 Ors. v. Alia Mallik : 60 (1985) C.L.T. 261.