✦ Bombay High Court · 19 Jun 2008

Suresh D. Mishra & Anr. v. Vishwambarshing M. Kuswah & Anr.

Criminal Application No. 4301 of 2004MHATRE, NISHITA MHATRE, NISHITA2 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Mr.Balkrishna Joshi for Applicants Mr.Sagar Kasar for Respondent No.1 Mr.H.J. Dedhia, APP, for Respondent State MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA JUNE 19, 2008 DATED: JUNE 19, 2008 JUNE 19, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The application has been filed for quashing Criminal Case No.23 of 2001 and to set aside the order of 5.7.2004 passed by the JMFC, Manmad for framing of the charge under sections 325, 324, 506A r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Court while considering the discharge application has not taken note of the fact that the petitioners were public servants and, therefore, a sanction u/s 197 would have to be obtained. He points out that without a sanction, no prosecution could lie against the public servant. He buttresses his arguments with the judgment of the Supreme Court in the (2006) case of Sankaran Moitra v/s. Sadhna Das & Anr., (2006) (2006) 4 SCC 584. He then submits that the enquiry conducted 4 SCC 584. 4 SCC 584. in this case has revealed that there were notings in the : 2 : register showing that the petitioners were on duty.

2.

On the other hand, the learned advocate for the respondents submits that the complaint shows that the petitioners were in civil clothes when the incident occurred. They were carrying liquor bottles with them and have directed the respondents who were vendors in the pantry car to serve them food. He submits that in such a situation no sanction is required as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Bakshish Singh Brar v/s.

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 19 Jun 2008. The bench was MHATRE, NISHITA MHATRE, NISHITA.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Criminal Application No. 4301 of 2004). ← Search more judgments