CHOUDHURY PARVEEN SULTANA versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR.

CHOUDHURY PARVEEN SULTANA versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR.

Acts done by the public servant that cannot be said to be part of official duty, such as threatening the complainant or her husband to withdraw a complaint, do not attract protection under Section 197 Cr.P.C.; hence, prior sanction is not required for prosecution.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Choudhury Parveen Sultana; Respondent: State of West Bengal; Respondent: Sahabul Hussain
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Order of High Court Quashing Proceedings
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Protection Under Section 197 Cr.p.c., Sanction for Prosecution of Public Servant, Scope of Official Duty
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Protection Under Section 197 Cr.p.c. Sanction for Prosecution of Public Servant Scope of Official Duty

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Choudhury Parveen Sultana

Appellant

State of West Bengal

Respondent

Sahabul Hussain

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Order of High Court Quashing Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. was necessary for prosecuting respondent No. 2 under Sections 384/506 IPC
  2. 2 Whether the acts attributed to respondent No. 2 were done in discharge of official duty

Ratio Decidendi

Acts done by the public servant that cannot be said to be part of official duty, such as threatening the complainant or her husband to withdraw a complaint, do not attract protection under Section 197 Cr.P.C.; hence, prior sanction is not required for prosecution.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment and order of the High Court set aside
  • Trial Court shall proceed with the trial of all accused, including respondent No.2