Prahlad Singh vs State of Haryana and ors.

G.S. Chahal, J.

Prahlad Singh has come to this Court in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 241 registered at police station City Hissar for offences under Sections 409, 420 & 34 Indian Penal Code.

The brief facts of the present case are that Prahlad Singh while employed as Head Constable (now Sub Inspector) was entrusted with the Challan file relating to FIR No. 409 registered on July 1, 1980 against Kewal Krishan and others. This challan was, however, not presented in the Court nor was handed over to any of the officials of that Court. The petitioner, however, made an entry in the register showing due submission of that challan in the Court. It was subsequently found that the petitioner had misappropriated the documents forming the challan and also falsified the official record.

The prosecution is being challenged on the basis that no sanction under Section 197 of the Code had been obtained before launching the prosecution and the challan had been put in Court without that sanction. It is also urged that no offence under Section 409 Cr.P.C. is made out and the State could have launched the prosecution in spite of the loss, if any, caused by the petitioner. It is also urged that no unlawful loss had been caused to the State by the alleged acts of the petitioner.

It is conceded at the bar that no sanction for prosecution of the petitioner as contemplated by Section 197 Cr.P.C. had been obtained. The Assistant Advocate General has tried to justify this act of the State on the basis that no sanction was required at the complained act was not done in performance of the official duty of the petitioner.

Section 197(1) reads as under :

"197 Prosecution of Judges and Public servants

(1) When any person who is or was a Judge or Magistrate or a public servant not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the Government is accused of any offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty, no Court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction :

(a) in the case of a person who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of the Union, of the Central Government;

(b) in the case of a person who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with affairs of a State, of the State Government."

The entire facts of this complaint relate to the discharge of his officials duties as Head Constable. It was a part of his duty to hand over the challan to the Court and also prepare a correct record of having handed over the challan I, thus, conclude that the petitioner could not be prosecuted except after obtaining sanction of the State Government as contemplated under Section 197 of the Code.

I find no merit in the submissions made by the learned counsel that the FIR did not disclose the commission of any offence. It was the duty of the petitioner to have discharged the trust in accordance with the instructions and he having failed to do the same, the allegations do make out a criminal offence. No case for quashing of the FIR is, thus, wade out.

Since the State has not obtained sanction under Section 197 of the Code, the proceedings initiated before the trial Court being illegal and void are hereby quashed. It shall be open to the prosecution to start the prosecution after getting necessary sanction, if so advised,

I may, however, add that any observations made above about the commission of the offence shall not be a finding on the merits of the case.

JUDGMENT accordingly.