D S BHORIA Vs. N SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There are two petitioners before me. The first petitioner, D.S. Bhoria, is an Assistant Traffic Superintendent of the Eastern Railway, posted at Dehri-on-Sone. The second petitioner, Jamuna Rai, is a Havildar of the Railway Protection Force of the Eastern Railwav. Both the petitioners are accused in a complaint case No. 382 of 1968, which has been instituted against them by N. Singh, a Ticket Collector of Gaya Railway Station of the Eastern Railway. This complaint was filed by the Ticket Collector on the 23rd May, 1968, by way of a protest petition against the police investigation in G. R. P. Case No. 26 (III) 68. The subject matter of the complaint is a certain incident which took place at the main gate of the Gaya Railway Station at about 10 A.M. on the 30th March, 1968.

(2.) According to the allegations made in the petition of complaint, while the complainant was on duty at the above time and place, he detected an unbooked child passenger in the company of a Third Class passenger going out of the wicket of the platform. The complainant challenged the said passenger and asked him to pay the requisite charge amounting to Rs. 1.10. The amount was paid. What happened thereafter has been stated in paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 of the complaint petition in the following terms.-- 4. That while your petitioner was taking out the EFT Book from his pocket for issuing necessary receipt to the passenger, accused No. 1, who was in Sada dress, all on a sudden, came near the gate and caught hold of your petitioner's collar and began to abuse the petitioner filthily. The accused also assaulted the petitioner with slaps and fists. 5. That the accused No. 2, who was also in Sada dress, joined the accused No. 1 and gave blows on the back and chest of the petitioner. 6. That both the accused persons thereafter forcibly dragged the petitioner away from the main gate with the result that the petitioner's shirt was torn and his number plate 2816 was lost and the gate remained unattended. It has then been stated that the complainant raised alarm whereupon the witnesses intervened and saved the complainant. Then it has been stated in paragraph 8:

(3.) The Munsif Magistrate, to whom the case was sent for disposal after the order of the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate dated the 7th June, 1968, whereby he took cognizance against the petitioners of offences under Sections 323, 500 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, was called upon to decide as to whether the prosecution against the petitioners could be proceeded with without sanction of the requisite authority under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure so far as the first petitioner is concerned and in face of Section 20 of the Railway Protection Force Act (Act XXIII of 1957), so far as the second petitioner is concerned.