STATE OF H.P. versus M.P. GUPTA

Citation: [2003] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 541 · Decided: 09-12-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DORAISWAMY RAJU · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

STATE OF H.P. 
A 
v. 
M.P. GUPTA 
DECEMBER 9, 2003 
[DORAISWAMY RAJU AND ARlJIT PASAYAT, JJ.] 
B 
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Section 197-Penal Code, 1860-
Sections 120-B, 420, 511, 467, 4.58 and 471-Criminal proceedings 
initiated against Public Servant for commission of offences-Necessity of 
requisite sanction of an appropriate authority-Held, Section 197 Cr. PC C 
does not extend its protective cover to every act or omission done by a 
public servant in service but restricts its scope of operation to only those 
acts or omissions which are done by a public servant in discharge of 
official duty-Official duty implies that the act or omission must have been 
done by the public servant in the course of his service and such act or D 
omission must have been performed as part of duty which further must have 
been official in nature-Jn the absence of the above, previous sanction 
under section 197 Cr.PC not required-Prev~ntion ?f Corruption Act, 
1947-Section 5 (2) (I) (d)-Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988-Section 
13(1)(d). 
E 
Respondent-Chief Conservator of Forests was alleged to have 
committed serious irregularities in certain purchases by the forest 
department. State Government ordered an Enquiry against the re-
spondent on receipt of complaints against the respondent. The Enquiry 
revealed commission of serious irregularities by the respondent. Two F 
separate charges were framed against the respondent (1) for offences 
under Sections 120-B and 420 read with 511 IPC and Section 5 (2) (1) 
(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (Old Act) corresponding 
to Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (New 
Act) and (2) for the offences under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 and 120- G 
B IPC and Section 5(2)(l)(d) of the Old Act corresponding to Section 
13(l)(d) uf the New Act for prosecution before the Special Judge 
(Forests). The. respondent raised a preliminary objection contending 
that the proceedings initiated against him are non est in the absence 
of the requisite sanctions under section 197 Cr.PC. The trial Judge H 
541 
542 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2003) SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 
A dismissed the preliminary objection of the respondent. The High 
B 
c 
. Court, in appeal by the respondent held that in the absence of requisite 
sanction in terms of Section 197 Cr.PC, the proceedings initiated 
against the respondent cannot proceed. Hence the appeal before this 
Court by the State. 
The respondent contended that the alleged acts were a part of the 
official duties and therefore a sanction was mandatory under section 
197 Cr.PC. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. The.protection given under Section 197 Cr.PC is to 
protect responsible public servants against the institution of possibly 
vexatious criminal proceedings for offences alleged to have been com-
mitted by them while they· are acting or purporting to act as public 
D servants. The policy of the legislature is to afford adequate protection 
to public servants to ensure that they are not prosecuted for anything 
done by them in the discharge of their official duties without reasonable 
cause, and if sanction is granted, to confer on the Government, if they 
choose to exercise it, cQmplete control of the prosecution. This protection 
E has certain limits and is available only when the alleged act done by the 
public servant is reasonably connected with the discharge of his official 
duty and is not merely a cloak for doing the objectionable act. If, in 
doing his official duty, ht acted in excess of his duty, but there is a 
reasonable connection between the act and the performance of the 
official duty, the excess will not be a sufficient ground to deprive the 
F public servant from the protection. The question is not as to the nature 
of the om.~nce such as whether the alleged offence contained an element 
necessarily dependent upon the offender being a public servant, .but 
whether it-was committed by, a pub~ic servant acting or purporting to 
act as such in the discharge of his official capacity. Before Section 197 
G Cr.PC can be invoked, it must be shown that the official concerned was 
accused of an offence alleged to have been . committed by him while 
acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duties. It is not 
the duty which requires examination so much as the act, because the 
official act can be performed both in the discharg~ of t_!ie official duty 
H as well as in dereliction of it. The act must fall

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.