Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |     Invalid Bank Guarantee Invocation Found Fatal to Recovery Claim: Delhi High Court Dismisses GAIL’s Appeal    |     Adverse Remarks in APAR Recorded Without Objectivity and Likely Motivated by Bias: Delhi High Court Quashes Biased APAR Downgrade of CRPF Officer    |    

Quashes Charges Against Public Servant for Lack of Sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. : Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, quashed the charges framed against a public servant, citing the lack of necessary sanction under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). The court’s decision highlights crucial aspects of legal procedure in cases involving public servants and sets a significant precedent.

The case, which drew considerable attention, involved allegations of criminal conspiracy and offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner, a DANICS officer, was charged with offenses including cheating and forgery. However, the crux of the court’s judgment was the absence of prosecution sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C.

In his decisive judgment, Justice Gedela observed, “It is clear that a strong suspicion would be sufficient to maintain an order on charge, however, the said strong suspicion must be founded on some material, which must be such as can be translated into evidence at the stage of trial.” The judgment underscores the necessity of following due legal procedures, particularly in the prosecution of public servants.

The court meticulously evaluated t”e facts and circumstances of the case, emphasizing the importance of sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. for prosecuting public servants. “The allegations against the petitioner are of offences in the discharge of his official duties and as such, the rigors of N.K. Ganguly (supra) shall apply on all fours,” Justice Gedela remarked.

Date of Decision: 22 November 2023

RAKESH BHATNAGAR VS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION      

Similar News