[Section 197, Cr.P.C.]
Sanction in Prevention of Corruption and Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act, XL of 1958 cases see Anti-Corruption Laws.
Prior Sanction for prosecution of public servants, by President or Governor or any other officer is repugnant to Islam. PLJ 1989 FSC 82. Zafar Awan v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Prior sanction for prosecution of Public Servants u/s. 197, Cr.P.C. and Sec. 6(5) of Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958 is repugnant to Injunction of Islam. Sec. 197, Cr. P.C. be replaced or repealed w.e.f. 30-6-92. PLJ 1992 SC 79. Federation of Pakistan v. Zafar Awan. PLD 1992 SC 72.
No sanction for prosecution of Public Servant is required after 30-6-1992 as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Federation of Pakistan through Secretary of Ministry of Law v. Zafar Awan Advocate High Court, PLD 1992 S.C. 72. PLJ 1996 (Lah.) 933, Muhammad Ashraf.
Whether sanction u/S. 197, Cr. P.C.is necessary may have to be determined "from stage" to stage' and necessity may reveal itself "in the course of the progress of the case," which could mean the proceedings at any stage. It would depend on the nature of the act committed by the accused. 1991 SCMR 2136. Mushtaq Hussain Bokhari.
When sanction necessary. Sanction under Section 197, Cr.P.C. is necessary when the offence is committed by the accused when he was a public servant and he is a public servant at the time of the initiation of proceedings against him in Court; if the accused is not a public servant when the proceedings are taken in the Court against him no sanction is necessary. AIR 1943 Cal. 527 Prosad v. Emp. 49 Cr.LJ 357 P.A. Ghosi v. Crown, 49 Cr.LJ 503 (PC) H.H.B. Gul v. Crown, 51 Cr. LJ 644 Zutshi. PLD 1962 SC 102=PLD 1962 SC 277 = PLD 1967 SC 23 = 1974 SCMR 445 = PLJ 1976 Kar. 198 = PLD 1965 SC 139.
Sanction is necessary when the offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant is committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty. (DB) PLD 1958 Lah. 649 Crown v. Abdul Rashid.
Sanction for prosecution u/S. 197, Cr. P.C. is necessary when offence is committed by omission of an officer of government, to act during the course of his official duty. 75 I.A. 41 Gill's Case Ref. 1991 SCMR 1261. Malik Ghulam Sabir v. Qazi Rehmat Ullah etc.
Act done in "virtue of Office" though "not within precise powers" requires sanction. Where an Inspector of Prices and Supplies recovered currency notes with slight force from complainant in order to collect evidence against him, held, sanction was required. (SC) PLD 1958 SC 21 Mati-ur-Rehman.
When acts fall outside the duty of public servant, the protective provisions of Section 197, Cr.P.C. shall not apply. (DB) Cr. LJ 221 Devidas v. Emp. 228 Ind. Cases 433.
Test.Test to find out whether the act was done by the servant of Crown in the execution of his duty, is whether Public Servant can reasonably claim that what he did was in virtue of his office. PLD 1948 PC 182 Albert West Meads v. King (PC) PLD 1948 PC 273 Phanindra Chandra Neogy v. King.
Assault by Public Servant on subordinate. Commission of an offence can never be part of the duties of any Public Servant, therefore the scope of protection under Section 197, Cr.P.C. must be interpreted in a wider sense than that covered by precise act which a public servant is authorized to do so. The act, therefore, must be connected with performance of his duties. Where the allegation by a subordinate railway employee was that the District Traffic Superintendent, "slapped, pushed and dragged by the shirt front", and also ordered the Station Master to keep the complainant under lock and key and the Station Master detained the complainant for some time, held sanction was necessary for assault but no sanction was required for wrongful confinement. Also held that the Magistrate could proceed with the charge for which no sanction is required in the meanwhile, when sanction is awaited, so that the prosecution is not stifled. (SC) PLD 1958 SC 27 Syed Ahmad.
Slight injury caused, in discharge of official functions, due to loss of tempter, without animosity, intending to correct the unmethodical working of a subordinate, held sanction was necessary. Proceedings before the Magistrate were stayed until sanction for prosecution was obtained. (SC) PLD 1960 SC 358 S.M.H. Rizvi v. Abdul Salam.
Sub-Divisional Officer of P.W.D. gave two blows to the complainant on the knee when she lost his temper on seeing that the complainant who was working on a road, had not done his job properly. Held it was not the official duty to beat the complainant; no sanction was necessary for proceeding against the S.D.O.. under Section 323, Penal Code. AIR 1935 Cal. 176 Ganga Parsad V. Brindaban. See also AIR 1946 FC 25 Sarjoo Parsad V. Emp.
Abuses. Accused in charge of a Government Office, on duty, abused and turned complainant out of the office, is protected under section 197, Cr. P.C. AIR 1939 FC 43 relied on. PLD 1951 Bal. 61 Ghulam Mohy-ud-Din Khan v. Muhammad Hassan Shah.
Abuses by a Magistrate. A Magistrate or a judicial officer who was holding a trial could not be said to be acting in a judicial capacity if he abused or defamed a witness or a legal practitioner before him. 25 CWN 957 Baishanab Charan v. Sukhomoy.
Magistrate flared up and filthily abused upon presentation of a transfer application under Section 526, Cr. P.C. and a complaint under Sections 500 and 504, P.P.C. was made held, the Magistrate could not avail of the protection of Section 197, Cr.P.C. PLD 1956 Lah. 865 Dilbar Hussain v. Khurshid Ahmed.
Taking law into his own hands. Public Servant taking law into his own hands and punishing person for act of indiscretion committed by him. Sanction under Section 197, Cr.P.C. not necessary. (DB) PLD 1963 Dacca 413 Muhammad Shahid.
A.S.I. and Police Constables do not belong to the particular class of public servants for which sanction for prosecution is required, hence no sanction to prosecute them is necessary under Section 197, Cr.P.C. PLD 1958 Kar. 483 Yaqoob v. Crown.
Beating and abusing by Police. A Police Officer abusing, slapping or beating a person does not do it in his official capacity as a public servant, therefore, no sanction is necessary, 1952 Cr.LJ 799 (Pak.) Behari Rai.
Superintendent of Police caned some students in consultation with the Deputy Commissioner. Held, sanction for prosecution was necessary. AIR 1946 Pat. 432, Nagwant v. Ife. 49 Cr.LJ 454 (Sindh) Naudiram.
Sub-Inspector of Police and two constables went to the house of a villager in order to seize the stolen property and beat him bitterly. Held sanction under Section 197, Cr. P.C. was not at all necessary. (DB) PLD 1958 Dac.111 A.K.M. Raza.
Sub-Inspector of Police charged with abetment of dacoity and arson cannot claim that he did this in virtue of his office. (DB) PLD 1956 Dac. 250 Ainul Haq v. Abdul Wahab.
Sanction under Section 197, Cr.P.C. for offence under Section 161, Cr.P.C. is not necessary. (PC) PLD 1949 P.C. 257 Lumbardar Zutshi v. King. PLD 1956 Dacca 218.
Illegal gratification; Where the act complained of is receiving illegal gratification that surely cannot be an act done or purporting to be done in the execution of duty. A.I.R. 1944 F.C. 66 H.T. Huntley v. Emp. See also Prevention of Corruption Act, II of 1947 and Pak. Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958.
Peon of Chief Election Commissioner holds civil post in connection with affairs of Central Government. Sanction for prosecution necessary. (DB) PLD 1965 Kar. 180 Zaheer Ali.
Sanction Offence must be specified in the sanction. 16 Mad. 468 Savarier. The Code does not prescribe any particular form for sanction under Section 197, Cr. P.C. 27 Mad. 54 Kalagava. No notice to the accused is necessary before sanction is given. 27 Mad. 54 Kalagava.
Abandoning duty by a public servant and failing to prevent or quell rioting. Sanction for prosecution is necessary. (DB) PLD 1965 Kar. 95 Amir Abbas v. Mazhar Ali.
Sanction for prosecution in a Hudood case u/S. 197, Cr.P.C. is not necessary when the accused as public servants are removable from service by authorities other than the Provincial Government or the Central Government, PLJ 1991 FSC 28, Mooso.
Sanction u/S. 197, Cr.P.C. where found lacking the complainant should be given time to obtain sanction instead of acquitting u/S. 265-K, Cr. P.C. PLD 1991 SC 1068. Muhammad Javed.