RAM KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA

RAM KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA

A sanction for prosecution under s.132 Cr.P.C. does not substitute for a sanction for cognizance under s.197 Cr.P.C. The proceedings against the appellant were without jurisdiction due to lack of the requisite sanction under s.197.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Ram Kumar; Respondent: State of Haryana
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 January 1987
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Punjab & Haryana High Court Judgment Dated 22.7.86 in Criminal Revision No. 615 of 1986
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Sanction for Prosecution of Public Servants, Armed Forces Protection, Jurisdiction for Cognizance, Criminal Procedure Code Sections 132 and 197
Criminal Law Procedure Sanction for Prosecution of Public Servants Armed Forces Protection Jurisdiction for Cognizance Criminal Procedure Code Sections 132 and 197

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ram Kumar

Appellant

State of Haryana

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Punjab & Haryana High Court Judgment Dated 22.7.86 in Criminal Revision No. 615 of 1986

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a sanction to prosecute under s.132 Cr.P.C. can substitute for a sanction to take cognizance under s.197 Cr.P.C.
  2. 2 Whether proceedings taken without proper sanction are valid

Ratio Decidendi

A sanction for prosecution under s.132 Cr.P.C. does not substitute for a sanction for cognizance under s.197 Cr.P.C. The proceedings against the appellant were without jurisdiction due to lack of the requisite sanction under s.197.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order passed by High Court set aside
  • Proceedings against appellant quashed as lacking in jurisdiction