Section 197 sanction is required for alleged excessive force reasonably connected to official duty.

The applicant alleged that on 16 January 2017, during an operation to remove encroachments, respondent nos. 3 and 4 and others beat him with lathis, fracturing his leg. After police allegedly took no action, he filed a complaint.

The Judicial Magistrate summoned respondent nos. 3 and 4 under Sections 324, 504 and 506 IPC. On their revision, the Sessions Judge set aside the summoning order, holding that the alleged acts had a connection with their official duty and that prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC was required. The applicant challenged that order under Section 482 CrPC.

1. Whether the Sessions Judge was justified in setting aside the summoning order on the ground that prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC was required

2. Whether the alleged assault, occurring during an operation to remove encroachments, was sufficiently connected with the respondents’ official duties to attract Section 197 CrPC

Section 197(1) CrPC bars a court from taking cognizance of an offence alleged against a qualifying public servant for an act committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of official duty, unless the requisite prior sanction is obtained.

The protection is limited to acts reasonably connected with official duty and does not extend to acts for which official position is merely a cloak; the relevant inquiry concerns the quality of the act and its connection with the duty, including whether failure to perform the act could expose the public servant to a charge of dereliction of duty (State of Orissa v. Ganesh Chandra Jew, as quoted in Shadakshari v. State of Karnataka).

An act involving excessive force is not automatically outside the protection if it was done in the performance or purported performance of official duty (Sankaran Moitra v. Sadhna Das).

The Court found that respondent nos. 3 and 4 had been deployed, along with other officers and personnel, to prevent encroachment pursuant to directions in a public-interest proceeding, and that the alleged incident occurred during that operation.

Relying on Sankaran Moitra, it rejected the applicant’s contention that an act causing a fracture could never be connected to official duty; the alleged use of force did not, by itself, remove the matter from Section 197’s scope.

It therefore considered the Sessions Judge’s order reasoned and saw no basis to interfere under Section 482 CrPC.

It dismissed the application under Section 482 CrPC.