Goberdhone Chowkidar vs Habibullah and Others

This is a rule calling upon the District Magistrate of Purnea to show cause why the sanction in this case for the prosecution of the Petitioners should not be revoked upon the grounds, first, that the said sanction does not comply with the requirements of sec. 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; and second, that, so far as the Petitioner Sakhawat Hossein is concerned, such sanction, in consideration of his youth, was unadvisable. After hearing the learned counsel on both sides, we are of opinion that, as regards the Petitioner Sakhawat Hossein, the sanction ought to be revoked, his prosecution in consideration of his age not being advisable. As regards the other Petitioners, we are of opinion that the sanction is defective in form, as it does not specify the Court or other place in which, and the occasions on which, the offence was committed, and as, further, in respect of the prosecution for giving false evidence under sec. 193 of the Indian Penal Code, it does not specify the particular statements in respect of which the offence is imputed. That being so, the sanction, as given, cannot stand and must be revoked. Wo were asked to rectify the informality in the sanction by supplying the necessary particulars. We do not think we should do that.

The result is that we revoke the sanction as regards the " Petitioner Sakhawat Hossein, on the ground that in consideration of his age, it is unadvisable that he should be prosecuted; and we revoke the sanction in regard to the other Petitioners on the sole ground that it is defective by reason of its not specifying the particulars we have referred to above. Wo pronounce no opinion upon the question whether the Court below may not, upon any fresh application, rectify the error it has committed.