LexBAKHSHISH SINGH BRAR versus SMT. GURMEJ KAUR AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A BAKHSHISH :>INGH BRAR v. SMT. GURMEJ KAUR AND ANR. OCTOBER 12, 1987 B [SABYASACHI MUKHARJI AND M.M. DUTT, JJ.] c Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: ss, 196 & 197-Rationale of- Protection of public servants in discharge of official duties-lmmunity from being harassed in criminal proceedings and prosecution-Citizens' rights-Protection of-Equally important. The petitioner, a police officer, was charged by the Judicial Magistrate under ss. 148/302/149/325/149 and under ss. 323/149 or the Indian Penal Code for allegedly causing grievous injuries to the comp· lainant and death or one or the alleged offenders during a raid and search for illicit liquor and unlicenced arms, and committed to the D Court of Sessions for trial. His contention was that nnder 11. 196 or the Code of Criminal Procedure the cognizance of the offence could not be taken nor the trial proceeded with without the sanction of' the appro- priate authorities under s. 197 or that Code. The Sessions Court took the view that unless cognizance was taken and the facts and the circumstances and the nature of the allegations involved in the case E were gone into, it would not be possible to determine whether or not the raiding party exceeded its limits or power while acting in the discharge of official duties. The High Court dismissed the application under s. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for staying further proceedings in the F Sessions Court. In the special leave petition to this Court on the question: Whether without the sanction under s. 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the proceedings could go on. G Dismissing the special leave petition, HELD: 1. The order passed by the Sessions Court was proper and the High Court was right In not interfering with the same. !4SSG I H 2. Criminal trials should not be stayed in all cases at the prelimi- 450 - B.S. BRAR v. SMT. GURMEJ KAUR [MUKHARJI, J.] 451 nary stage because that will cause great damage to the evidence. It is A necessary to protect the public servants in the discharge of their duties. They must be mode immune from being harassed in criminal proceed- ings and prosecution, that is the rationale behind ss. 196 and 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. But it is equally important that rights of the citizens should he protected and no excesses should be committed. lo the facts and circumstances of each case protection of public officers B and public servants functioning in discharge of official duties and pro- tection of private citizens have, therefore, to be balanced by finding out as to what extent and how far is a public servant working in discharge of his duties or purported discharge of his duties, and whether the public servant has exceeded his limit. [455F, C-E) Pukhraj v. State of Rajasthan and Anr., [1974) 1 S.C.R. 559, C referred to. Io the instant case, it is alleged that grievous injuries were in- flicted upon the complainant and as a result of injories one of the alleged accused had died. The question is while investigating and performing his duties as a police officer was it necessary for the D petitioner to conduct himself in such a manner which would result m such consequences. Therefore, the trial should proceed. Hoecessary the question of sanction under s. 197 of the Criminal Procedore Code may be agitated after some evidence have been noted by the Sessions Court. [455C, HI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 419of 1987. From the Judgment and Order dated 11.12.1986 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 7421-M of E 1986. F R.K. Garg, Ms. Suman Kapoor and R.P. Singh for the Peti- tioner. P.N. Puri, R.S. Sodhi and R.S. Suri for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 4 SABYASACID MUKHAR.fl, J. This is a petition for leave to G appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution against the judgment aBd order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated 11th of De- cember, 1986. By the order the High Court has dismissed the applica- H 452 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1988] 1 S.C.R. A lion under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying that ,..i_ further that proceedings be stayed in Sessions Case No. 1 of 25th of March, 1985 under sections 148/302/325/323/149/120-B of the l.P.C. The High Court dismissed this petition because it found no merit in the same. B The petitioner, herein alongwith 14 more persons were charged by an o
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.