While allowing the quashing petition of a police officer, the Patna High Court has reiterated that the safeguard of prior sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC cannot be disregarded merely because the acts alleged may appear to go beyond the strict bounds of official duty, so long as they are reasonably connected to the discharge of official functions.

The petition before the High Court was filed to quash an order passed in a Complaint Case, where the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna, rejected the application seeking discharge under Section 245 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), where cognizance was taken for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in G.C. Manjunath & Others Vs. Seetaram (2025), the Single Bench of Justice Chandra Shekhar Jha observed, “As previously observed, a mere excess or overreach in the performance of official duty does not, by itself, disentitle a public servant from the statutory protection mandated by law. The safeguard of prior sanction under Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be disregarded merely because the acts alleged may appear to go beyond the strict bounds of official duty, so long as they are reasonably connected to the discharge of official functions.”

Advocate Rana Vikram Singh represented the Petitioner while APP Mithlesh Kumar Khare represented the Respondents.

Factual Background

The complainant had alleged that the accused persons forcefully entered the house when her husband was not available, and the petitioner dashed the complainant against the wall, causing her injury. It was also alleged that on the orders of the petitioner, other accused persons lifted the complainant and snatched a gold chain from the neck of the complainant. As per the complainant, she was taken to the police station and confined to 'Hajat' and subjected to cruelty. Ultimately, the complainant had alleged commission of offences under Sections 147, 342, 341, 323, 354, 506, 504, 379, 337, 338, 448 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that the allegation raised was in the background while the petitioner and his associate police personnel were discharging their official duty, and therefore, sanction for prosecution was mandatorily required in view of section 197 of the CrPC. “Nonetheless, the prolonged pendency of the enquiry for an inordinate period of four years in a complaint case, without substantial progress, is per-se a matter of serious concern and raises questions regarding the propriety and fairness of the proceedings”, it said.

It was further noticed that the acts alleged against the accused-petitioner were directly attributable to the discharge of his official duties, specifically in connection with the investigation of a case which was pending against the complainant. It was instituted against the husband of the complainant as well as against the complainant, where, after trial, they were convicted by the Judicial Magistrate for the offence punishable under Sections 341 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Bench made it clear that the allegation levelled against the accused/petitioner also did not appear grave, and the same couldn’t be said to exceed the limit. Moreover, even the injury report did not support the allegation.

Thus, the Bench allowed the petition and set aside the impugned order rejecting the discharge prayer.

Cause Title: Abhay Narayan Singh v. The State of Bihar (Case No.: Criminal Miscellaneous No.52434 of 2024)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Rana Vikram Singh, Kumar Ravish, Rohit Kumar

Respondent: APP Mithlesh Kumar Khare, Advocates Sikandar, Pramod Kumar Yadav, Neeraj Kumar, Pinki Kumari

Click here to read/download Order


Patna High CourtJustice Chandra Shekhar Jha

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.