S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition No.469/2004 P.D. Mali Vs. State and ors. Dated : 01.04.2010 HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI,J. None present, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Punia, PP for the State. Mr. Vijay Saini for respondents. *** By way of this criminal Misc. Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, the petitioner has prayed to set aside the order dated 25th February, 2004 rendered by Special Judge, SC/ST Cases, Ajmer whereby the learned Special Judge, in its revisional jurisdiction, allowed the revision and set aside the order dated 13th November, 2003 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railway), Ajmer. The short question springing for consideration in the instant petition is as to whether the prosecution could be launched against the non-petitioners-S.D. Sharma and Hemant Patekar for the offence under Section 186 of Indian Railways Act without obtaining sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railway), Ajmer vide order dated 13th November, 2003, found that both these non-petitioners were under intoxication while on duty and they could not get protection under Section 197 of Cr.P.C., but the learned Special Judge, in its revisional jurisdiction, held that the -2- prosecution could not be launched without obtaining sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. against them and the learned trial Court was directed to grant two month's time to the petitioner to obtain sanction for launching prosecution against non- petitioners. The learned Special Judge has dealt with the matter in detail and found that the non-petitioners were not drunk while discharging their official duties. The allegation that under intoxication they were discharging their duties was found to be incorrect. In view of this, the Special Judge, held that to launch prosecution against the non-petitioners sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. was necessary. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not present in the Court. I, having considered the submissions made in the petition, am of the view that the arguments raised in the petition are found to be capcitom and not tenable. The order of the Special Judge dated 25th February, 2004 seems to be just and proper which, warrants no intervention and the same deserves to be dismissed and stands dismissed accordingly. (MAHESH BHAGWATI)J. Pcg