BALBIR SINGH Vs. MOHINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FACTS giving rise to this revision are that Shri Mohinder Singh, Junior Sports Officer (Swimming) in the Directorate of Sports, Punjab, for the purpose of getting himself If transferred, met Shri Balbir Singh, Director of Sports. Punjab on 8th May, 1981, at about 4 p.m. Shri G. S. Sarao, who accompanied Shri Mohinder Singh, explained the difficulties of the latter and the problems faced by him which necessitated his request for transfer. It is alleged that Shri Balbir Singh lost his temper and hurled abuses on Shri Mohinder Singh, called him a corrupt officer and further said that he did not want to see his face. It is also alleged that Shri Balbir Singh said, "Kutia Chamara Men Har Sarne Tenu Naukri Ton Kadan Di Sochda Hari, Te Tu Menu Badli Bare, Kehenda Hen." At this Shri G. S. Sarao intervened and requested Shri Balbir Singh not to abuse in the name of anybody's caste or community. Then Shri G. S. Sarao and Shri Mohinder Singh came out of the room of Shri Balbir Singh As the police did not take any 'action on the report lodged by Shri Mohinder Singh, lie filed the present. complaint under section 505, Indian Penal Cede read with section 7 of the Untouchability Act After recording of preliminary evidence, Shri Balbir Singh was summoned. He put in appearance and presented an application under section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure opposing his prosecution for want of sanction. The trial Magistrate accepted the objection The revision petition filed by Shri Mohinder Singh having been accepted. Shri Balbir Singh has preferred this revision petition.

(2.) AS regards the ingredients of section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the sole question. to be determined is whether Shri Balbir Singh committed the alleged offences while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty. The large number of rulings cited by the carried counsel for the parties need not be referred to, inasmuch as the determination of the said question depends on facts of each case. However, an authoritative pronouncement of the Supreme Court in S.B. Saha and Others v. M. S. Kochar, 1979 Cr. L J. 1367 : AIR 1979 S. C. 1841, lays down : "The words" any offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty" employed in section 197 (1) ate capable of narrow as well as wide interpretation, If these words are construed too narrowly, the section will be rendered altogether, sterile, for, "it is no part of an official duty to commit an offence, and never can be". In the wider sense, these words will take -under their umbrella every act constituting an offence, committed in the course of the same transaction in which the official duty is performed or purports to be performed. The right approach to the import of these words lies between these two extremes. While on the one hand, it is not every offence committed by a public servant while engaged in the performance of his official duty which is entitled to the protection of section 197 (1), an act constituting an offence directly and reasonably connected with his official duty will require sanction for prosecution under the said provision. It is the quality of the act that is important, and if it falls within the scope and range of his official duties,. the protection contemplated by section 197 will be attracted." Applying the ratio to the facts of the present cage, it is no gainsaying that Shri Balbir Singh as Director of Sports, as regards the request of Shri Mohinder Singh for transfer, acted in the discharge of his official duty. The allegation that Shri Balbir Singh called him a corrupt officer has nexus with the transfer or Shri Mohinder Singh. Similarly, the other offending words attributed to Shri Balbir Singh appear to be reasonably connected with the official duty which Shri Balbir Singh was performing. The contention of the learned counsel for Shri Mohinder Singh that expression of opinion as to the integrity of an officer is a confidential matter and that. Shri Balbir Singh should not have called him a corrupt officer in the presence of Shri 0. S. Sarao, suffice it to say that this aspect of the case has relevance to the commission of the alleged offence and the gravity thereof. It need hardly be said that the alleged commission of an offence is a prerequisite for invoking section 197 of the Code. As such, the fact that the conduct of a public servant is entirely unbecoming of the performance of his official duty and amounts to commission of an offence, cannot be of any consequence so far as the applicability of section 197 of the Code is concerned.

(3.) FOR the foregoing reasons, I allow this revision petition and set aside the impugned order. Petition allowed