Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.70 seconds)
Harpreet Kaur vs The State Of Bihar on 16 April, 2025 cites

State Of Orissa Through Kumar ... vs Genesh Chandra Jew on 24 March, 2004

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 (Ganesh Chandra Jew [State of Orissa v. Ganesh Chandra Jew, (2004) 8 SCC 40 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 2104] ). If the above tests are applied to the facts of the present case, the police must get protection given under Section 197 of the Code because the acts complained of are so integrally connected with or attached to their office as to be inseparable from it. It is not possible for us to come to a conclusion that the protection granted under Section 197 of the Code is Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60841 of 2024 dt.16-04-2025 19/26 used by the police personnel in this case as a cloak for killing the deceased in cold blood."
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 144 - A Pasayat - Full Document

State Of Haryana And Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal And Ors on 21 November, 1990

No.60841 of 2024 dt.16-04-2025 16/26 Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur (supra) and Bhajan Lal (supra), has the jurisdiction to quash the FIR/complaint; and xv) When a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by the alleged accused, the court when it exercises the power under Section 482 Cr. P.C., only has to consider whether or not the allegations in the FIR disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and is not required to consider on merits whether the allegations make out a cognizable offence or not and the court has to permit the investigating agency/police to investigate the allegations in the FIR."
Supreme Court of India Cites 44 - Cited by 19733 - S R Pandian - Full Document

K. Satwant Singh vs The State Of Punjab(And Connected ... on 28 October, 1959

The true test as to whether a public servant was acting or purporting to act in discharge of his duties would be whether the act complained of was directly connected with his official duties or it was done in the discharge of his official duties or it was so integrally connected with or attached to his office as to be inseparable from it (K. Satwant Singh [K. Satwant Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 266 : 1960 Cri LJ 410] ). The protection given under Section 197 of the Code has certain limits and is available only when the alleged act done by the public servant is reasonably connected with the discharge of his official duty and is not merely a cloak for doing the objectionable act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 42 - Cited by 145 - S J Imam - Full Document

Jitendra Kumar & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 24 January, 2017

Also, in Jitendra Kumar v State of Bihar, (2019) 4 PLJR 1128, delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashwini Kumar Singh of Patna High Court, held that "taking the accused in police custody and mercilessly assaulting him with hard and blunt substance in police lock-up in the name of custodial interrogation, by no stretch of imagination can be said to be an act either in discharge of official duty or in purported discharge of official duty."
Patna High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 1 - J Saran - Full Document

Shadakshari vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 August, 2023

In a very recent judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shadakshari v. State of Karnataka, (2024) SCC OnLine SC 48, it has been held that "this court has been consistent in holding that Section 197 CrPC does not extend its protective cover to every act or omission of a public servant while in service. It is restricted to only those acts or omissions which are done by public servants in the discharge of official duties." By no stretch of imagination, inflicting injuries and torture on the arrested persons be held as acts in the discharge of official duties. Thus, in compliance of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the court does not find any need for previous sanction of the government in this case.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1