CBI's Overreach Thwarted: Advocates Cleared of Section 353 IPC Allegations After 17 Years. Legal advocates vindicated after enduring years of wrongful accusation; professionalism upheld by judicial scrutiny.

Case Note & Summary

Introduction: Context: Criminal Revision Application No. 559 of 2024 filed against the rejection of a discharge application. Core Issue: Allegation under Section 353 r/w Section 34 IPC for obstructing CBI officers during an official search in 2007. Appellants: Advocates (Applicants No. 1 and 2) and a law intern (Applicant No. 3). Incident Details:

Initial Complaint:

CBI conducted a search at a client's office with a warrant. Advocates visited at the client's request after 10 hours of the ongoing raid. Allegations arose after the advocates questioned the identity of CBI officers.

FIR and Arrest:

Complaint filed under Section 353 r/w 34 IPC alleging obstruction of public duties. Applicants arrested, released on bail the following day. Legal Journey:

Prosecution's Narrative:

Claims of obstruction when applicants requested CBI officers' identity cards. Prosecution based solely on statements by the five CBI personnel involved.

Defense's Arguments:

Lack of evidence for assault or obstruction. Actions consistent with professional legal duties. No disruption or halting of the search was proven. Judicial Findings:

Analysis of Section 353 IPC:

The offense involves assault or criminal force deterring public servants from lawful duty. Evidence provided did not substantiate obstruction or assault; mere exchange of words occurred.

Professional Conduct of Advocates:

Applicants’ presence at the scene aligned with their legal role. Law enforcement agencies misused authority in retaliation for questioning identity. Decision:

Order:

The discharge application was allowed. FIR under Section 353 IPC quashed due to lack of prima facie evidence.

Costs Awarded:

Rs. 15,000 each to applicants for undue hardship endured over 17 years. Recoverable from the complainant (CBI officer). Acts and Sections Discussed: Section 353 IPC: Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from duty. Section 34 IPC: Common intention in committing an offense. Ratio Decidendi: Mere verbal exchanges or requests for identity verification do not constitute obstruction under Section 353 IPC. Professional conduct by advocates cannot be criminalized without credible evidence of intent to obstruct lawful duty. Subjects:

Misuse of authority, Advocates' professional duties, Discharge application under IPC offenses.Section 353 IPC, Legal profession, CBI, Abuse of law, Advocates' rights, Judicial scrutiny.