No Prior Sanction Needed To Prosecute Officers Below Rank Of Inspector, Article 14 Cannot Be Applied Against Administrative Hierarchy: Madras HC

Section 197 of CrPC (Section 218 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023) deals with obtaining prior sanction before taking cognizance of an offense involving a person who is or was a Judge or Magistrate or a public servant not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the Government. A group of officers from the cadre of Police Constable to the Inspector of Police had claimed that they were also entitled to protection under this section.

The bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira and Justice K Rajasekar observed that though Article 14 of the Constitution guaranteed the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law, it could not be misconstrued to apply against the hierarchies in the administrative aspects.

“It is not in dispute that Article 14 guarantees the right to equality before the law and equal protection of law to all citizens of India, regardless of their caste, creed, religion, gender or any other personal characteristic. However, it cannot be misconstrued to apply against the hierarchy in the administrative aspects. While Article 14 certainly forbids class legislation, however, it permits the reasonable classification of persons, objects, and transactions by law and the only restriction could be that such classification should not be arbitrary, artificial, or evasive,” the court observed.

The court was answering a reference made to it on whether the term “removable by government” could be interpreted in a broad perspective to include police officers from the rank of Constable to Inspector of Police. The reference was made in a batch of criminal original petitions in which the officers in the cadre from Police Constable to Inspector of Police had questioned the cognisance taken by the trial court in cases where the officers were alleged to have committed illegal activities.

The petitioner officers had argued that the officers were bound to be in the field of investigation and some criminals, to escape from the clutches of law, may initiate frivolous and vexatious complaints against them which necessitated their protection under Section 197. It was argued that the classification of officers based on 'removal by government', was unreasonable, arbitrary, lacking intelligible differential, and was in strict violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.

The officers argued that the appointing authorities were only delegated the power of removing subordinate officers and the same would not take away the power of the Government to remove public servants. Thus, it was argued that an officer in the rank of Inspector and below could be interpreted to be one removable by the Government thus entitling them protection under Section 197 CrPC.

The state, on the other hand, argued that when a lower authority was empowered to remove a public servant from office, such a public servant could not be said to be removable by or with the sanction of the Government. The state submitted that the classification of public servants was on a reasonable basis.

The court noted that the legislation, in its wisdom, had restricted the scope and application of the provision with a reasonable differentia. The court added that if the word “any person” in Article 14 of the Constitution was assumed to have exempted and excluded classification and restriction in all enactments, no statute with any reasonable differentia could ever be implemented.

The court agreed with the submission of the State Public Prosecutor and noted that when authority was vested with the power to appoint or dismiss a government servant, it could not be said that such a government servant was removable by or with the sanction of the Government.

Though the officers also argued that the Government being the revisional/appellate authority, the benefits of Section 197 CrPC should be applicable to them, the court noted that such a revision or appeal arises only after a conclusion/decision by the superior and thus the subordinate officers could not claim coverage under Section 197 CrPC.

Thus, relying on the precedence set by the Apex Court in similar cases, the court observed that the police officer from the rank of Constable to Inspector of Police are not entitled to protection under Section 197 CrPC.

Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr.R.Gandhi Senior Counsel, Mr.C.Arul Vadivel Senior Counsel, Mr.S.C.Herold Singh Senior Counsel, and Mr.R.Anand

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.Hasan Mohamed Jinnah, State Public Prosecutor and Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar, Additional Public Prosecutor

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 289

Case Title: Karthikeyan and Others v Thangapandian

Case No: CRL OP(MD) No.12975 of 2018