MITHU SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dtd. 5/12/2024, passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No.21/2020 whereby the learned Judge dismissed the application under Sec. 197(2) Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner asserts that at the time of the incident in question, the petitioner was not present at the scene and has been implicated solely based on call records linking him to the accused, Shankar Singh. At the pertinent time, the petitioner was serving as a Police Sub-Inspector in Ajmer District and was attending court in Dungla, District Chittorgarh, to provide evidence in a separate matter, while the incident occurred in Chittorgarh. Furthermore, counsel argues that pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), no prosecution can be initiated against the petitioner for actions taken in the course of performing his official duties without prior sanction from the competent authority. In this instance, it is contended that no such sanction was obtained from the appropriate authority as mandated by law. Consequently, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, absent the requisite sanction, would constitute a violation of the provisions of Sec. 197 of the Cr.P.C. Counsel further contends that the learned trial court erred in not considering these critical aspects of the matter and subsequently rejected the application under Sec. 197(2) of the Cr.P.C. The impugned order, therefore, is fraught with serious legal deficiencies and merits quashing and setting aside. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner and supported the impugned order passed by the trial court.

(3.) At this juncture, we may refer the case of P.Arulswami v. State of Madras reported in AIR 1967 SC 776, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under: