Upgrad LLM

how to prosecute the sub-inspector, crpc 197 whom to apply?

Learning to share

Sub-Inspector Filed False Case on me and my Family and Want to prosecute him/her, What is the proceedure to get permission to prosecute and how to prosecute? Whom should i apply under crpc 197, what if the application was rejected?

Thanks,

 
Reply   
 

You need no permission for any complaint against anybody with police authorikty he may be dgp or igp or even a constable. Yes you can file your complaint with his higher authority that is one option.

 
Reply   
 


self employed

First file written complaint in same police station and then go up in hierarchy. If thst does not yield result then go to Magistrates court. Before filing any complaint collect all evidence specially thru RTI> 

 
Reply   
 
Legal consultant

Section 197 CrPC gives protection to the officers removable by the Central or State Government. A sub-Inspector is removable by the S.P or D.I.G who is his appointing authority and not by the State Government or Central Government.In police forces the minimum rank for whom sanction is required for prosecution is Dy.SP.  So there is no need to seek sanction for the prosecution of the S.I. By the way, for what offence you need to prosecute him? Please note that sanction is required for prosecution only and not for recording any F.I.R or investigation. There are many case laws in this support. However, as a measure of safety you can file an RTI application asking the information about the ranks in the police forces according to hierarchy as to which rank is removable by the State Government and which which is not.

 
Reply   
 
Advocate/ nadeemqureshi1@gmail.com

197. Prosecution of Judges and public servants.

 

(1) When any person who is or was a Judge or Magistrate or a public servant not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the Government is accused of any offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty no court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction-

 

(a) In the case of it person who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of the Union, of the Central Government;

 

(b) In the case of a person who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of a State, of the State Government:

 

1[Provided that where the alleged offence was committed by a person referred to in clause (b) during the period while a Proclamation issued under clause (1) of article 356 of the Constitution was in force in a State, clause (b) will apply as if for the expression "State Government" occurring therein, the expression "Central Government" were substituted.

 

(2) No Court shall take cognizance of any offence alleged to have been committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Union whole acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty, except with the previous sanction of the Central Government.

 

(3) The State Government may, by notification, direct that the provisions of subsection (2) shall apply to such class or category of the members of the Forces charged with the maintenance of public order as may be specified therein, whenever they may be serving, and thereupon the provisions of that sub-section will apply as if lot the expression "Central Government" occurring therein, the expression "State Government were substituted.

 

2[(3A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3), no court shall take cognizance of any offence, alleged to have been committed by any member of the Forces charged with the maintenance of public order in a State while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty during the period while a Proclamation issued trader clause (I) of article 356 of the Constitution was in force therein, except with the previous sanction of the Central Government.

 

(3B) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Code or any other law, it is here by declared that any sanction accorded by the State Government or any cognizance taken by a court upon such sanction, during the period commencing on the 20th day of August, 1991 and ending with the date immediately preceding the date on which the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1991, receives the assent of the President, with respect to an offence alleged to have been committed during the period while a Proclamation issued under clause (1) of article 356 of the Constitution was in force in the State, shall be invalid and it shall be competent for the Central Government in such matter to accord sanction and for the court to take cognizance thereon.]

 

(4) The Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, may determine the person by whom, the manner in which, and the offence or offences for which, the prosecution of such Judge, Magistrate or public servant is to be conducted, and may specify the court before which the trial is to be held.

 

1. Added by Act 43 of 1991, sec. 2 (w.e.f. 2-5-1991)

 

2. Ins. by Act 43 of 1991, sec. 2 (w.e.f. 2-5-1991)

 

STATE AMENDMENTS

 

Assam:

 

For sub-section (3) of section 197, the following subsection shall be submitted, namely.

 

"(3) The State Government may, by notification, direct that the provisions of' subsection (2) shall apply.

 

(a) To such class or category of the members of' the Forces charged with the maintenance of' public order, or

 

(b) To such class or category of other public servants [not being persons to whom the provisions of sub-section (1) or subsection (2) apply] charged with the maintenance of public order.

 

As may be specified in the notification wherever they may be serving, and thereupon the provisions of sub-section (2) shall apply as if' for the expression Central Government occurring therein, the expression State Government were substituted."

 

[Vide President's Act 3 of 1980. (w.e.f. 5-6-1980)].

 

Maharashtra:

 

After section 197, the following section shall be inserted namely.

 

"197A. Prosecution of commissioner of Receiver appointed by civil court.- When any person who is a Commissioner or Receiver appointed by a court under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is accused of any offence alleged to have committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his functions as Commissioner or Receiver, no court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction of the court, which appointed such person as Commissioner or Receiver, as the case may, be."

 

[Vide Maharashtra act 60 of 1981, sec. 2 (w.e.f 5-10-1981)]

 
Reply   
 
Advocate/ nadeemqureshi1@gmail.com

Anadi Charan Jena v/s Vijay Kumar Mohanty, 1991(1) Crimes 629 (Orissa)

 
Reply   
 
add o cat

lodge an official complaint to his superior with copies up their heirarchy until ig... you bet quake starts 
 

 
Reply   
 
officer

As per the import of Sec 197, the SI is not protected under the ibid Sec. Therefore you can file an FIR or an aaplication to register FIR u/s 156 or Private complaint to magistrate u/s 200 of  Crl.P.C. if we want take criminal action against the officer .If you want departmental action agsint the officer then make a complaint to SP of the district. I both the case you must have matrial to show prima facie case agaisn the officer. If none of these steps solves your problem and if the action of the SI affected your fundemental rights then write a complaint aganst the SI to state/central Human rights commissions. If you want to be sure of action agains the SI then, read the Police Act and Rules made thereunder and PSOs of the state so that you can frame the SI for his ommission and commission as per law.

 
Reply   
 
Advocate

First of all you have to file a complaint against him to his officials by registered Ack. post and if after receiving there is no action taken against him, you have to file a private complaint U/S 200 Crpc. against him and their officials.

 
Reply   
 
self working

i do agree with all the jurist but more i do agree with Rahman sir.

 

1) A sub-Inspector is removable by the S.P or D.I.G who is his appointing authority and not by the State Government or Central Government.

2) In police forces the minimum rank for whom sanction is required for prosecution is Dy.SP.  So there is no need to seek sanction for the prosecution of the S.I.

3) Please note that sanction is required for prosecution only and not for recording any F.I.R or investigation. There are many case laws in this support.

4) The ranks in the police forces according to hierarchy as to which rank is removable by the State Government and which which is not.

Sir  regarding 4 point any information than pls provide.

 

Point 1,2 & 3 sir any case law than also pls do provide.

 

Sir also u said that (((((((((((police forces the minimum rank for whom sanction is required for prosecution is Dy.SP.  So there is no need to seek sanction for the prosecution of the S.I. )))))))))))))) but as per section 197 of the Crpc, 1973 the words are used as -------------------------- Any person who is a public servant. sir so can we say as per ur answer that S.I. is not a public servant & he also doesn't come under the words any persons. Also sir can we say that if he is not a public servant so he does not comes under section 21 of the IPC, 1860.

 

Sir pls do support the answer with the case law if any.

 

Thanks

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

CrPC MASTERCLASS!     |    x