MP High Court Quashes FIR Against Railway Vigilance Officers Accused Of Harassing Ticket Examiner, Cites Possible 'Extraneous Influence'

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against Railway Vigilance Officials for allegedly harassing a ticket examiner and subjecting him to caste-based slurs, raising serious concerns over the manner in which the case was initiated.

The court noted that the case gave rise to "reasonable apprehension that process was influenced by extraneous considerations" in the registration of FIR, particularly as the complaint was acted upon by the then Inspector General of Police, Rewa–who belonged to the same caste as the complainant, despite the incident falling outside his territorial jurisdiction.

The bench of Justice BP Sharma observed,

"A significant aspect which merits consideration is the manner in which the criminal law was set into motion. The alleged incident having taken place at Katni Railway Station, the jurisdiction to entertain and act upon the complaint squarely vested with the railway police authorities having territorial jurisdiction over Katni or Jabalpur. However, the complaint was entertained by the then Inspector General of Police, Rewa, who undisputedly did not exercise territorial jurisdiction over the place of occurrence. Notwithstanding this limitation, the said authority proceeded to take cognizance of the complaint on the very same day and directed registration of the FIR. This Court is unable to accept such action as a routine administrative forwarding of a complaint. On the contrary, the sequence of events reveals a clear departure from settled jurisdictional discipline and reflects an unwarranted assumption of authority.

It has specifically been brought to the notice of this Court that respondent No.4, the then Inspector General of Police, Rewa, and respondent No.8, the complainant, belong to the same caste. The unusual promptitude with which the complaint was acted upon, despite the apparent lack of jurisdiction, coupled with this undisputed social proximity, gives rise to a reasonable apprehension that the process was influenced by extraneous considerations".

Background

The case stemmed from an incident on December 29, 2011, during a vigilance inspection conducted on the Rewa-Jabalpur Intercity Train. A Ticket Examiner, Pyar Singh Meena who stated that he belongs to SC/ST category and alleged while he was on duty in in the train a passenger who introduced himself as Shukla requested a seat. When he refused a seat due to nonavailability, the said person allegedly started abusing him, claiming to be a Vigilance Officer.

Thereafter, he allegedly occupied the complainant's seat and began making phone calls. When the train reached Jabalpur Railway Station, the complainant got down and found 4–5 RPF personnel along with Sub-Inspector Shishir Kumar and Vigilance Inspectors Kukreja and Srivastava present there. It was further alleged that the complainant was taken to the RPF station by holding his hand, abused, subjected to castebased slurs, stripped, searched, and mentally and physically harassed.

Based on his complaint, crime no 44/2012 was registered at the Government Railway Police Station, Katni, under IPC Sections 294 (Obscene acts and songs), 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation), 34 (common intention) and the Railways Act.

However, an initial inquiry conducted by railway police authorities at Jabalpur found no evidence against the petitioners and concluded that no offence was made out.

Despite the earlier clean chit, the petitioners alleged that the complainant also filed a complaint against the petitioners through the All India Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Railway Employees Association. Pursuant thereto, and allegedly at the behest of respondent No. 4–who was then the Inspector General of Police, Range Rewa and who also belongs to the same caste and category as the complainant, Crime No. 44/12 was registered at GRP Katni.

Consequently, the petitioners filed Writ Petitions in 2012, which were disposed of vide common order dated 06.08.2012 directing the Director General of Police, Bhopal to examine the matter, deal with it, and take necessary steps in accordance with law without being influenced by any extraneous pressures or considerations.

In compliance with the said order, an enquiry was conducted by the Superintendent of Police (Rail). Vide letter dated 24.04.2014 addressed to Special Director General (Rail), Bhopal, it was clearly mentioned that only Vigilance Officer Subhash Yadav was found guilty. No other vigilance officers were found to have abused or assaulted the complainant and no evidence was found to warrant prosecution against the other vigilance officers or the RPF personnels.

However, the petitioners alleged, that through a letter dated 23.03.2015 issued by the SHO, GRP Katni, District Katni, the petitioners were directed to appear before him for taking further steps in connection with Crime No. 44/12 registered at the said police station, purportedly in compliance with the orders passed in the writ petitions and directions of superior officers.

Findings

The bench noted that the primary consideration was - whether the acts alleged against the petitioners can be said to have been committed while acting or purporting to act in discharge of official duty so as to attract the protection provided under Section 197 CrPC, and the FIR has been lodged with malafide intention.

The bench noted that the incident occured during the course of vigilance inspection carried out by the petitioners; herein, the functioning of respondent no 8, who is a ticket examiner, was subjected to scrutiny.

The bench emphasized the fact that while the alleged incident took place at Katni Railway Station, coming squarely within the territorial jurisdiction of Katni or Jabalpur Railway police authorities, the matter was entertained by the IGP of Rewa.

Further, the bench observed that the Railway Police Authorities of Jabalpur, upon initial inspection, found no substance in the complaint. However, a case was registered subsequently at Katni, not on the basis of incriminating material but rather due to the intervention of the then IGP of Rewa.

The bench noted that this unusual handling of the complaint, combined with the fact that both the complainant and the concerned IGP belonged to the same caste, raised concerns about possible extraneous influence.

Further, the court examined the applicability of the shelter under Section 197 CrPC. The expression 'official duty' appearing in the said provisions has been interpreted in a broad and pragmatic manner by the Supreme Court. The bench reiterated that if the act complained of is reasonably connected with the discharge of official duty, the protection of Section 197 CrPC would apply.

The bench further reiterated that a sanction under Section 197 is not a mere procedural requirement but a condition precedent. In the absence of such a sanction, the prosecution of a public servant for acts connected with official duty cannot be sustained.

Thus, applying the aforesaid principle, the bench held that the alleged acts attributed to the petitioner arise during the course of vigilance inspection, in their official capacity. Thus, even if the allegations contained in the complaint at face value, the same cannot be separated from the official context, in which the incident is alleged to have occured.

Thus, the protection under Section 197 CrPC would be applicable in this case. Thus, the court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings arising out of crime no 44/2012.

Case Title: Sunil Kumar Shrivastava v State Of Madhya Pradesh [WP-4643-2015]

For Petitioner: Advocate Ajay Shankar Raizada

For State: Advocate Yaduvendra Dwivedi

Click here to read/download the Order