The Allahabad High Court dismissed a plea by four police officials accused of assaulting a doctor, emphasizing that a police uniform is not a license to commit illegal acts. The Court ruled that the assault was outside their official duties and rejected their request to quash the criminal case.
Allahabad: The Allahabad High Court recently dismissed a plea by four police officials who had requested to quash the criminal proceedings against them. They were accused of assaulting, abusing, and unlawfully confining a doctor and his companions.
Justice Raj Beer Singh, who was presiding over the case, pointed out that simply wearing a police uniform cannot be used as a shield to justify illegal actions. He emphasized that actions that go beyond a public servant’s official duties do not need prior approval for prosecution under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
ALSO READ: Lady IPS, Heartless Police, All Police Suspended
The Court said,
“Merely because the applicants are police officials, it would not provide any shield to the applicants. Police uniform is not licence to assault innocent citizens.”
The accused police officials, Sub-Inspector Animesh Kumar and Constables Kuldeep Yadav, Sudhir, and Dushyant, had filed a plea under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), seeking to have the complaint against them quashed.
The complaint was registered under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 342 (wrongful confinement), and 394 (voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery) of the Indian Penal Code.
The case arose from an incident on June 28, 2022, when the complainant, a doctor, was traveling with his staff from Kanpur. Their vehicle reportedly brushed against the police officials’ car. Later that night, the complainant’s vehicle was intercepted by three cars near Khudaganj.
The police officers allegedly dragged the complainant and his companions out of their vehicle, abused them, physically assaulted them, stole a gold chain and cash, and detained them unlawfully at the Saraimeera police post for about one and a half hours.
The complainant and his companions were medically examined, and the injury reports confirmed the assault. The police officials, on the other hand, argued that they were on patrol duty at the time of the incident and claimed that the complaint was a response to them warning the complainant for reckless driving.
ALSO READ: ABUSE OF OFFICE BY POLICE||Supreme Court Cancels The Bail Of The Police Officer
They also argued that the prosecution could not proceed without the sanction required under Section 197 of the CrPC, as the acts were allegedly committed while they were performing their official duties. However, the High Court rejected these arguments.
Referring to a recent Supreme Court ruling in the case of Om Prakash Yadav v. Niranjan Kumar Upadhyay, Justice Raj Beer Singh reminded that Section 197 is meant to protect public servants from unnecessary lawsuits for actions taken in the course of their official duties. However, this protection is only available when there is a “reasonable connection” between the act and the official duty.
The Court found that no such connection existed in this case. It noted that there was no material evidence to suggest that the police officials were on authorized patrol duty at the time of the incident. The Court also observed that no General Diary entry had been provided to support their claim of being on official duty.
It concluded that the actions of assaulting civilians, damaging their property, and unlawfully detaining them could not be considered part of their official duties.
ALSO READ: “Prima facie, this is illegal”: Supreme Court Slams UP Police
the Court remarked,
“It is not the case of applicants that complainant or his companions committed any crime or any case was registered against them. Even otherwise, the act of assault and commission of robbery has no reasonable or rational nexus with discharge of official duty,”
Additionally, the complainant’s version of the events was supported by his testimony recorded under Section 200 of the CrPC, witness statements recorded under Section 202 of the CrPC, and medical examination reports that corroborated the injuries.
Taking all of this into account, the Court concluded that there was enough evidence to proceed with the criminal proceedings against the accused police officials. As a result, the plea to quash the case was dismissed, and the criminal proceedings against the police officials will continue.
This ruling highlights that law enforcement officers cannot misuse their uniform to cover up illegal acts. Even when a police officer is performing their duty, any act outside the scope of that duty cannot be justified by their position.
Click Here to Read More Reports on Police Case
