Police assault at a station falls outside official duty and requires no Section 197 sanction.

The petitioner, a Police Sub-Inspector, sought to quash a revisional order setting aside the Magistrate’s dismissal of the second respondent’s private complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C.

The complaint alleged that the petitioner assaulted the complainant at the police station when he had been called there.

The complainant relied on a wound certificate recording swelling, abrasion and tenderness.

The Revisional Court held that the alleged assault was not an act in discharge of official duty, found sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. unnecessary, and directed the proceedings to continue for offences under Sections 323, 324, 504 and 506 IPC.

The petitioner challenged that order and the pending criminal case under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

1. Whether sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. was required before proceedings could continue against the petitioner for the alleged assault

2. Whether the Revisional Court erred in setting aside the Magistrate’s order dismissing the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. and directing the proceedings to continue

Section 197 Cr.P.C. protects a public servant from prosecution without prior sanction only where the alleged act has a reasonable connection with the discharge of official duty; it does not protect conduct that is not part of, or reasonably connected with, that duty.

Under Sections 203 and 204 Cr.P.C., a Magistrate may dismiss a complaint or issue process, respectively, after considering the material before the court.

The High Court considered its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the offences alleged under Sections 323, 324, 504 and 506 IPC.

No precedent was cited in the judgment

The Court found that the complaint specifically alleged an assault at the police station and that the wound certificate recorded injuries consistent with the allegation.

It agreed with the Revisional Court that assaulting a person secured at a police station was not an act in the discharge of public duty; the petitioner could take action in accordance with law, but could not use force in that manner.

Accordingly, Section 197 Cr.P.C. did not bar the proceedings, and the Revisional Court had not erred in setting aside the dismissal and permitting the case to proceed

It directed that the proceedings continue for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 504 and 506 IPC, while clarifying that its observations should not influence the trial on the merits.

The petitioner was permitted to raise objections to the offences invoked at the stage of framing charges.