MUKANCHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Makanchand has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that by issuing an appropriate writ order or direction the order of the Government dated 21st March, 1970, canceling the sanction accorded on 19th January, 1970, to prosecute the respondents Nos. 4 and 5, be quashed.

(2.) THIS writ petition raises an important question of law whether State Government is competent to withdraw the sanction once accorded by it under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to prosecute a public servant.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 4 Shri Bahadurisingh was the Sarpanch of village Ranideshipura, while respondent No. 5 Magna was the Panch of that Panchayat A notice was issued by the Gram Panchayat, Ranideshipura to the petitioner along with 8 other residents of that village directing them to remove the unauthorised construction of Chabutaries within a period of seven days from the date of the date of the service of the notice This notice was served on the petitioner on 17th April, 1967 It is alleged that the petitioner filed an appeal against the said notice in the Panchayat Samiti, Siwana and that body granted stay order on the 20th April, 1967 According to the averments made in the writ petitioner took the copy of the stay order issued by the Panchayat Samiti, Siwana, to respondent No. 4 Shri Bahadursingh, but he refused to accept that copy of the stay order and stated that he would receive it after the chabutaries were removed. It is said that on the 24th April, 1967, when clear seven days were not completed, Shri Bahadursingh came to the Panchayat office and decided to get the Chabutaries demolished. When the petitioners came to know of this intention of respondent No. 4 he again went to him and brought to his notice the stay order passed by the Panchayat Samiti, but he refused to take any notice thereof and with the help of respondent No. 5 Shri Magna demolished the Chabutaries despite the repeated protest made by the owners of those Chabutaries. The petitioner, when he was convinced that the respondent No. 4 was bent upon to harass the petitioner by illegally demolishing the Chabutaries, went to the Additional Superintendent of Police, Barmer, for help, but before any police help could reach the village the Chabutaries were removed.