On January 17, the Supreme Court delivered a verdict on a criminal appeal, asserting that Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) does not mandate prior sanction for prosecuting a public servant accused of creating fake documents. The court reasoned that such alleged acts fall outside the purview of the official duties of the public servant.
The case involved the High Court's dismissal of criminal proceedings against a public servant due to the absence of prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC. Overturning this decision, Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan allowed the complainant-appellant's criminal appeal, emphasizing the necessity of prior sanction for prosecuting a public servant.
The Supreme Court elucidated that Section 197 CrPC does not shield every act or omission of a public servant during service but is confined to those occurring in the discharge of official duties. In this context, the court observed, "It is restricted to only those acts or omissions which are done by public servants in the discharge of official duties."
The complainant-appellant alleged that the accused public servant had fabricated official documents by exploiting his position as a Village Accountant. The central question before the court was whether sanction was required to prosecute the public servant facing charges of creating fake documents through the misuse of his official position.
The court clarified that the public servant's alleged offenses, such as fabricating records or misappropriating public funds, do not constitute actions in the discharge of official duties. It emphasized that the official capacity merely enables such acts but does not establish an integral connection with the crimes committed during the same transaction.
The court stated, "It is not the official duty of the public servant to fabricate false records and misappropriate public funds, etc. The official capacity only enables him to fabricate the record or misappropriate the public fund, etc. It does not mean that it is integrally connected or inseparably interlinked with the crime committed in the course of the same transaction."
Highlighting that Section 197 CrPC does not extend protection to every act or omission by a public servant in service, the court asserted that its scope is limited to acts performed in the discharge of official duties. Relying on precedents, the court concluded that manufacturing documents or fabricating records cannot be considered part of a public servant's official duty.
In overturning the High Court's decision, the Supreme Court held that the quashing of the complaint and chargesheet was erroneous. The court clarified that its observations were specific to the case at hand and should not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the matter. All contentions were kept open for further consideration.
In essence, the judgment reinforced the understanding that Section 197 CrPC does not provide blanket immunity to public servants for acts unrelated to the discharge of their official duties, particularly in cases involving the fabrication of documents or misappropriation of funds.
TAGS: Supreme Court Criminal Procedure Section 197 Public Servant Fake Documents Official Duty High Court Criminal Proceedings Prior Sanction Village Accountant Fabrication of Records
