SC: POCSO Guilt Presumption Not Absolute, Acquits Accused  ||  Supreme Court: Promotion Cannot Be Claimed as a Vested Right under Repealed Rules  ||  Supreme Court: Promotion Cannot Be Claimed as a Vested Right under Repealed Rules  ||  SC: Unexplained 5-Day Sample Custody Gap Breached S.52A, Acquits 2 after 20 Years  ||  P&H High Court: Illegal Search Alone Does Not Justify Quashing of Complaint under PNDT Act  ||  Bom HC: Creating WhatsApp Group Without Employer's Permission Not Ground for Compulsory Retirement  ||  Madras HC: Lack of Son’s Moral Support Alone Cannot Sustain Father’s Maintenance Claim under CrPC  ||  Kerala HC: University Professor doesn't Occupy 'Public Office', Quo Warranto Not Maintainable  ||  Bombay HC Allows Cutting of 1,237 Mangroves for Connector Bridge in Mumbai’s Western Suburbs  ||  Calcutta HC Orders Return of 3-Year-Old to Adoptive Couple, he wasn't Abandoned    

Amal Kumar Jha v. State of Chhatisgarh - (Supreme Court) (26 Apr 2016)

Officer travelling for official meeting is in discharge of official duty

Criminal

The Supreme Court allowed an appeal by of an official in-charge of a government hospital in District Raigad against prosecution without grant of sanction.

In the instant case, allegations of failing to discharge of official duty were raised when Appellant, instead of providing government vehicle for shifting a patient from primary health centre, used the same to travel to his monthly official meeting.

The Court opined that “the omission complained of due to which offence is stated to have been committed, was intrinsically connected with discharge of official duty of the Appellant”. As such, Appellant was protected by Section 197 CrPC and could not have been prosecuted without sanction.

Relevant : State of Orissa & Ors. v. Ganesh Chandra Jew MANU/SC/0264/2004 State of Madhya Pradesh v. Sheetla Sahai & Ors. MANU/SC/1425/2009 Section 197 CrPC Act

Tags : OFFICER   GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL   OFFICIAL DUTY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved