Kerala High Court Denies Relief To Petitioner Suppressing Facts, Orders Enquiry Into Allotment Of Govt Scheme Houses On Puramboke Land Candidate Missing Physical Test For Minor Illness Has No Enforceable Right To Rescheduling: Supreme Court Prolonged Incarceration And Parity Constitute Valid Grounds For Regular Bail: Supreme Court Accused In Cheque Bounce Cases Cannot File Evidence-In-Chief By Affidavit Under Section 145 NI Act: Orissa High Court Borrowers Have No Right To Personal Hearing Before Fraud Classification, But Full Forensic Audit Report Must Be Supplied: Supreme Court Pendency Of Matrimonial Dispute With General Allegations Not A Valid Ground To Deny Public Employment: Allahabad High Court Minimum Five Persons Mandatory To Prove 'Preparation For Dacoity' Under Section 399 IPC: Gujarat High Court Suit For Specific Performance Not Maintainable Without Prayer To Set Aside Termination Of Agreement: Madras High Court Trial Court Must Indicate Material Forming Basis Of Charge, Mechanical Framing Of Charges Impermissible: Madhya Pradesh High Court Gated Community Association Cannot Exclude LIG/EWS Allottees, Single Unified Society Mandatory: Telangana High Court Voluntary Retirement Deemed Accepted If Positive Order Of Refusal Is Not Communicated Within Notice Period: Supreme Court Court Cannot Convict One Accused And Acquit Another On Same Evidence: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Due To Unreliable Last-Seen Evidence And Principle Of Parity 138 NI Act | Accused Cannot Rebut Presumption Of Legally Enforceable Debt At Pre-Trial Stage In Cheque Bounce Cases: Supreme Court More Meritorious PWD Candidates From Reserved Categories Can Claim Unreserved PWD Posts In Open Competition: Supreme Court Meritorious Reserved Candidates Can Claim Unreserved Horizontal Vacancies Based On Merit: Supreme Court Employee Not Entitled To Gratuity Until Conclusion Of Both Departmental And Criminal Proceedings: Supreme Court Stamp Duty Recovery Against Legal Heirs Is Strictly Limited To The Extent Of Inherited Estate: Allahabad High Court Single Lathi Blow On Head During Sudden Altercation Amounts To Culpable Homicide Under Section 304 Part II IPC, Not Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Habeas Corpus Maintainable For Child Custody Against Father; Cannot Be Dismissed Merely Due To Alternate Remedy: Allahabad High Court "Plea Of Ignorance In Digital Era Inexcusable": Punjab & Haryana HC Imposes Rs 10K Cost On Accused For Hiding Prior Bail Dismissal Discrepancies In Name And Age On Monthly Pass Fail To Establish 'Bona Fide Passenger' Status In Railway Accident Claim: Delhi High Court "Last Seen" Theory A Weak Link If Time Gap Is Wide: Bombay High Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Life For Murder Failure To Conduct Pre-Anaesthetic Check-Up Prima Facie Amounts To Gross Medical Negligence Under Section 304A IPC: Kerala High Court Gujarat High Court Bans AI From Judicial Decision-Making, Lays Down Strict Policy for Court Use of Artificial Intelligence

Supreme Court Allows Prosecution of Police Personnel in Assault Case, Rejects Quashing of Charges

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling today, the Supreme Court of India upheld the prosecution of police personnel accused of assault in a case involving unauthorized entry, abuse, and physical assault. The apex court rejected the quashing of charges sought by the accused police personnel, thereby clearing the path for further legal proceedings.

The case stemmed from a complaint filed by Dr. S.M. Mansoori, represented by his legal heir, against Surekha Parmar and others. The complaint alleged that Surekha Parmar, an Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) at the Mahila Police Station in Jabalpur, along with fellow officers, forcefully entered Dr. Mansoori's residence and subjected him and his family members to physical abuse and verbal harassment.

The High Court had previously quashed the charges against the accused police personnel, citing the absence of sanction under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.). However, the Supreme Court opined that it was premature to conclude whether the acts alleged were performed within the scope of official duty. The requirement for sanction, according to the Court, should be determined after the evidence is recorded.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court emphasized that at this stage, the allegations raised serious concerns and warranted further investigation. The Court's decision has effectively reinstated the charges against the police personnel and permitted the continuation of legal proceedings.

The verdict delivered by a bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal marks an important step in upholding accountability and ensuring that public servants are held responsible for their actions. The ruling also clarifies that the absence of sanction under Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. should not impede the prosecution process when the allegations raise doubts about the performance of official duties.

The case will now proceed before the appropriate court, where evidence will be examined, and a final decision on the issue of sanction will be made. The judgment serves as a reminder that the law will not shield those accused of misconduct, irrespective of their official positions, and underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding justice and the rule of law.

Date of Judgment: April 12, 2023

S.M. MANSOORI (DEAD) THR. L.R. vs SUREKHA PARMAR & ORS. 

Latest Legal News