GOUR CHANDRA ROUT & ANOTHER versus THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, CUTTACK

GOUR CHANDRA ROUT & ANOTHER versus THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, CUTTACK

The appeal was allowed because the required authorisation by the Governor under section 198-B(3)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 was not validly given; neither the evidence nor the documents established specific authorisation for the lodging of the complaint. A general authorisation in advance does not satisfy the statutory requirement; the authorisation must relate to a specific complaint and be a considered decision by the Governor himself.

Parties
Appellant: Gour Chandra Rout; Appellant: Ram Chandra Kar; Respondent: Public Prosecutor, Cuttack
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
23 November 1962
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence Affirmed by the Orissa High Court
Outcome
Appeal Allowed
Legal Topics
Sanction for Prosecution, Defamation of Public Officials, Powers Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, Requirements of Authorisation Under Section 198 B
Criminal Law Defamation Constitutional Law Press & Media Law Sanction for Prosecution Defamation of Public Officials Powers Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 Requirements of Authorisation Under Section 198 B

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gour Chandra Rout

Appellant

Ram Chandra Kar

Appellant

Public Prosecutor, Cuttack

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence Affirmed by the Orissa High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sanction for prosecution under section 198-B(3)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 for defamation of the Governor was validly granted.
  2. 2 Whether a general authorisation is sufficient under section 198-B(3)(a) or a specific authorisation is necessary.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the required authorisation by the Governor under section 198-B(3)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 was not validly given; neither the evidence nor the documents established specific authorisation for the lodging of the complaint. A general authorisation in advance does not satisfy the statutory requirement; the authorisation must relate to a specific complaint and be a considered decision by the Governor himself.

Court Disposition

Appeal Allowed

Orders

  • Conviction and sentences against the appellants set aside.
  • Fines, if paid, to be refunded to the appellants.