Customs Officers Who Assaulted Complainant To 'Extract Truth' Cannot Be Said To Have Acted Outside Official Duties: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court has set aside criminal proceedings against customs officers who alleged to have committed assault and grievous hurt to the complainant while interrogating him, for the absence of sanction required under Section 197, CrPC. The court ruled that such excess of power could not be construed as being entirely disconnected from the official duties of the petitioners. Section 197, CrPC provides that no cognizance for any offence could be taken against public servants which were alleged to have been committed by them while discharging their official duties, without sanction from the appropriate government. The bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Garg held that, “While it is clear that the petitioners may have exceeded their powers by beating and torturing the complainant to extract the truth, this cannot be construed as an act entirely disconnected from their official duty. Even though the petitioners acted in excess of their duty, such actions were still within the broader context of their official responsibilities. This excess of power does not negate the protection granted under Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. as the offence remains connected to their official duties.” The Court referred to the Supreme Court case of Sankaran Moitra v Sadhna Das and Ors. in which the Apex Court held that even in relation to the use of excessive force to the extent of killing someone, while the performance of duty, Section 197(1), CrPC, could not be bypassed by saying that killing a man could never be done in an official capacity. Similarly, in another Apex Court case of State of Orissa v Ganesh Chandra Jew, it was held that, “If in doing his official duty, he acted in excess of his duty, but there is a reasonable connection between the act and the performance of the official duty, the excess will not be a sufficient ground to deprive the public servant of the protection. The question is not as to the nature of the offence such as whether the alleged offence contained an element necessarily dependent upon the offender being a public servant, but whether it was committed by a public servant acting or purporting to act as such in the discharge of his official capacity…It is not the duty which requires examination so much as the act, because the official act can be performed both in the discharge of the official duty as well as in dereliction of it.” In this background, the Court observed that any action taken in good faith by a public servant while discharging official duties could not be prosecuted against without prior sanction. It was stated that such sanction was imperative to protect the public officers from facing “harassive, retaliatory, revengeful and frivolous proceegings”. The Court further ruled that the nature of the offence played a significant role in deciding the application of Section 197, CrPC especially when the offence arose from actions reasonably connected to the discharge of official duties, like abuse of power or excess use of authority. Accordingly, it was held that since the petitioners were acting as custom officers at the time of the alleged offence, they might have exceeded their powers by beating the complainant, however, the actions remained within the broader context of their official responsibilities. Hence, the petition was allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners were set aside. Title: Rakesh Mandola & Anr. v State of Rajasthan Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 68 Counsels for Petitioners: Mr. Nishant Bora Counsels for Responsents: Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP Mr. Abhishek PuroClick Here To Read/Download The Order

Customs Officers Who Assaulted Complainant To 'Extract Truth' Cannot Be Said To Have Acted Outside Official Duties: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Agrawal

“While it is clear that the petitioners may have exceeded their powers by beating and torturing the complainant to extract the truth, this cannot be construed as an act entirely disconnected from their official duty," the court said.

Tags