Source: https://www.lawweb.in/2017/06/whether-sanction-for-prosecution-is.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 19:14:36+00:00

Document:
Law Web: Whether sanction for prosecution is required if government servant is prosecuted for criminal breach of trust?
Whether sanction for prosecution is required if government servant is prosecuted for criminal breach of trust?
conviction and sentence deserved to be set aside.
sanction having not been obtained, the trial was vitiated.
substantiate the said stand, reliance was placed on Dr.
, State of U.P. v.
and Choudhury Parveen Sultana v.
Kumar Dhankar (supra) and Bakshish Singh Brar v.
are in any other capacity than a public servant.
dispensing with the requirement of sanction”.
to have done so in discharge of his official duty.
under Section 197 CrPC may not be called for.
not be separately treated or dealt with.
refrain from entering into the said arena.
CrPC. Similar order was passed by another trial Magistrate.
it noted two cases had arisen as two complaints were filed.
concerned with the said aspects in the present case.
Court which had overturned the decision of the lower court.
contention raised, the Court referred to Section 197 CrPC.
Court also took note of the fact that the decision in H.H.B.
Gill (supra) had been approved in Albert West Meads v.
, Phanindra Chandra v. The King22 and R. W.
the official duty there can be no protection”.
swayed away by what has been stated in B. Saha (supra).
holding in trust to be dealt with in accordance with law.
Indian Penal Code was necessary”.
as, Om Prakash Gupta v. State of U.P.; Baijnath v.
judgment with a survey of all those cases”.
On the aforesaid analysis, the appeal was dismissed.
note of certain other authorities.
the sanction may be necessary”.
duty that has been done has the colour of office.
that sanction under Section 197 CrPC was not obtained.
The High Court accepted the view of the learned Magistrate.
clearly illegal and cannot be sustained”.
IPC. Similar principle has been laid down in State of H.P.
v. M.P. Gupta30. In Parkash Singh Badal and another v.
has been reiterated in Choudhury Parveen Sultana v.
in understanding the ratio of the decisions of this Court.
with the latter office will also relate to the former office.
the State Government and accordingly allowed the appeal.
within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
on account of deep and pervasive control of the government.
stitch in time can save nine.
revision petition in accordance with law.

References: v.

 v.

 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v.

v. 
 v.

 v.