Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal of BSNL Officers Seeking Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC for Prosecution Under Maharashtra Private Security Guards Act. Protection under Section 197 CrPC not available to employees of public sector corporations even if they are 'public servants' under Section 21 IPC.

  • 8
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) and its officers against the rejection of their challenge to prosecution under the Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1981. The respondent had filed a complaint alleging that BSNL engaged unregistered security guards in violation of the Act. The Magistrate issued process in 2003, which the appellants sought to recall on grounds including lack of sanction under Section 197 CrPC, claiming they were public servants. The High Court rejected the writ petition, relying on Mohd. Hadi Raja v. State of Bihar to hold that protection under Section 197 CrPC was not available to officers of government companies. The Supreme Court affirmed, noting that appellants 3 and 4 had been absorbed into BSNL and ceased to be government employees, thus not entitled to sanction. For appellant 2, who was on deputation, the Court held that the question of his status was a matter of evidence to be decided by the Magistrate during trial. The Court reiterated that employees of public sector corporations are not entitled to Section 197 CrPC protection, as established in Mohd. Hadi Raja and subsequent cases.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 197 CrPC - Public Servant - Employees of public sector corporations are not entitled to protection under Section 197 CrPC even if they are 'public servants' under Section 21 IPC, as held in Mohd. Hadi Raja v. State of Bihar. (Paras 8-10)

B) Criminal Procedure - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 197 CrPC - Absorption in Corporation - Officers who were originally in Central Civil Services but were absorbed in a public sector corporation cease to be government employees and are not entitled to sanction under Section 197 CrPC. (Para 7)

C) Criminal Procedure - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 197 CrPC - Three Mandatory Requirements - The three requirements are: (a) accused is a public servant; (b) removable from office by or with sanction of Central or State Government; (c) offence committed while acting in discharge of official duty. (Para 11)

D) Criminal Procedure - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 197 CrPC - Deputation - Status of an officer on deputation to a corporation is a matter of evidence to be considered by the Magistrate during trial. (Para 12)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether employees of a public sector corporation, who were originally appointed in Central Civil Services but later absorbed in the corporation, are entitled to protection under Section 197 CrPC requiring sanction for prosecution.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that appellants 3 and 4 were not entitled to sanction under Section 197 CrPC as they were absorbed in BSNL and ceased to be government employees. For appellant 2, the Court left the question of his status to be determined by the Magistrate during trial based on evidence.

Law Points

  • Section 197 CrPC protection not available to employees of government companies or public undertakings
  • Absorption in corporation terminates government service status
  • Sanction requirement depends on status at time of offence
  • Three mandatory requirements for Section 197 CrPC protection
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (SC) (8) 2

Criminal Appeal No. 503 of 2010

2019-08-19

Navin Sinha

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and Others

Pramod V. Sawant and Another

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against dismissal of writ petition challenging prosecution for lack of sanction under Section 197 CrPC.

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought quashing of criminal proceedings for want of sanction under Section 197 CrPC.

Filing Reason

Appellants were prosecuted for engaging unregistered security guards in violation of the Maharashtra Private Security Guards Act.

Previous Decisions

Magistrate issued process in 2003; recall rejected in 2004; revision allowed and remanded in 2004; Magistrate again rejected recall in 2005; writ petition dismissed in 2006; revision dismissed in 2007.

Issues

Whether employees of a public sector corporation are entitled to protection under Section 197 CrPC as 'public servants'. Whether absorption in a corporation terminates the status of a government employee for the purpose of Section 197 CrPC. Whether the status of an officer on deputation to a corporation requires evidence for determination of sanction requirement.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that they were public servants as they were originally in Central Civil Services and removable only by the President, thus requiring sanction under Section 197 CrPC. Respondents argued that appellants 3 and 4 were absorbed in BSNL and ceased to be government employees; appellant 2's status was unclear.

Ratio Decidendi

Employees of public sector corporations, even if they are 'public servants' under Section 21 IPC, are not entitled to protection under Section 197 CrPC requiring sanction for prosecution, as held in Mohd. Hadi Raja v. State of Bihar. Absorption in a corporation terminates the status of a government employee for the purpose of Section 197 CrPC.

Judgment Excerpts

The protection by way of sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not applicable to the officers of government companies or the public undertakings even when such public undertakings are 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution on account of deep and pervasive control of the Government. Admittedly the salary of the appellant is not paid by the Government. He at the relevant time was not in the service of the State. Prosecution against an officer of a government company or a public undertaking would not require any sanction under Section 197 CrPC.

Procedural History

A criminal complaint was filed in 2003; Magistrate issued process; recall rejected on 06.04.2004; criminal revision allowed on 07.09.2004 with remand; Magistrate again rejected recall on 07.06.2005; writ petition dismissed on 22.12.2006; fresh revision dismissed on 05.09.2007; present appeal filed.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 197
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 21
  • Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1981: Section 3(3)
  • Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme, 1981: Clauses 26(2)(3), 27, 39
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal of BSNL Officers Seeking Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC for Prosecution Under Maharashtra Private Security Guards Act. Protection under Section 197 CrPC not available to employees of public sector corporations even if ...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Modifies Conviction from Murder to Culpable Homicide in Sudden Fight Case — Sita Ram v. State of NCT of Delhi. The Court applied Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC and Section 304 Part II IPC, holding that the sudden quarrel over electric...