Police Officials Cannot Claim Protection for Their Highhanded Behaviour: HC
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court made it clear that police officers cannot get a shield under Section 197 CrPC for violations or not obeying orders of the court.
The section is a protection given to public servants from not being removed from office of any offence alleged to have been committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of official duties.
Justice E.V. Venugopal was dealing with a petition filed by V. Suresh, Warangal Subedari circle inspector in 2012. He challenged the orders of the Warangal chief judicial magistrate directing the superintendent of police and the DIG, Warangal, to proceed against him on charges of obstructing the execution of the search warrant issued by the court. He also challenged the cognizance taken by the court in the criminal case registered against him.
The charges against Suresh were that he had obstructed the discharge of duties of the court-appointed advocate commissioners, who came to the Subedari police station on court’s orders to verify if five persons, who were apprehended by the Subedari police, were in the police station. If they were found there, the advocate commissioners were directed to produce them before the chief judicial magistrate court. The five persons were supporters of the Telangana statehood agitation and affiliated to the state’s ruling party. They were allegedly involved in pelting stones at a bus in which the then Chief Minister was travelling to Warangal to attend Kakatiya utsavalu.
It was reported that Suresh had obstructed the advocate commissioners from searching the police station. When they found the five persons in the police station, the police had stated that they would produce them before the court.
The Warangal court felt that it was a violation of the court orders by the circle inspector and ordered registration of case against him under charges of IPC Section 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant). The court also took cognizance of the charges.
Suresh’s contention before the High Court was that CrPC Section 197 stipulated that no court shall take cognizance of any offence by a public servant in the discharge of his official duties except with the previous sanction of the state government. In the instant case, no such sanction has been given and as such the proceedings impugned are liable to be set aside.
But, the judge reminded that the advocate commissioners appointed by the court are also defined as public servants in the eye of law as per Section 2 (d) CrPC and their failure in executing the courts warrant is due to the obstruction caused by the circle inspector, which was utter derogation to the orders of the court. Hence, Justice Venugopal said that the circle inspector cannot seek protection under Section 197 CrPC.
Justice Venugopal observed that the purport of CrPC Section 197 was to accord sanction for prosecuting a public servant so as to prevent abuse of process of law and to avoid vexatious litigation.
