Alleged Illegal Detention, Assault Beyond Official Duty; No Sanction Needed To Prosecute Police Constable: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court has affirmed the order of the trial court and the revisional court to hold that no prosecution sanction under Section 197 CrPC was required before taking cognizance against the appellant-police officer who was accused of severely beating the respondent while the latter was allegedly under illegal detention.
The bench of Justice Ravi Chirania affirmed that the act done by the petitioner could not be said to be in performance of his official duty, rather he acted beyond the same.
For context, the respondent was a social worker, who was allegedly taken by the police forcibly, illegally detained and tortured. In relation to the illegal detention, there was a public protest. During the protest, the respondent was locked inside the Court of Sub-divisional Magistrate, by the petitioner, and physically assaulted with a stick.
Thereafter, an FIR was registered against the petitioner regarding the illegal detention and custodial violence.
A negative report was filed by the police in this regard. However, trial court took cognizance in the case. This decision was challenged before the revisional court which also upheld the cognizance. Hence, both the orders were appealed against, before the Court.
The petitioner referred to Section 197, CrPC, and argued that without a prosecution sanction against him, no cognizance could have been taken in the case in relation to the acts performed by him in furtherance of his official duties.
It was submitted that he was posted at the alleged place of the incident and was performing his duty along with other police personnels. However, he was targeted individually and made the scapegoat for the entire incident.
After hearing the contentions, the Court referred to the Supreme Court decision in the case of Suneeti Toteja v State of U.P and Anr. in which it was held that,
“…for the purpose of application of Section 197, a sine qua non is that the public servant is accused of any offence which had been committed by him in “discharge of his official duty”. The said expression would clearly indicate that Section 197 of the CrPC would not apply to a case if a public servant is accused of any offence which is de hors or not connected to the discharge of his or her official duty.”
The Court opined that the conduct of the petitioner of giving severe beatings to the respondent by locking him insider the court could not be said to an act done in discharge of his official duties in the capacity of a police constable.
The Court further highlighted that the complaint was filed only against the petitioner and not any other police personnel which made it amply clear that only the petitioner acted beyond his official duty.
In this background, the Court held that there was no need for the prosecution sanction in the present case, and hence, there was no infirmity in the orders of the trial court or the revisional court.
Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.
Title: Vinod Kumar v State of Rajasthan & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 360