(A) Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.190— Cognizance of offence – Prima facie case – Offence of assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of duty – Accused were members of a social organization, who accompanied a team of Labour Enforcement Officers during inspection of a brick kiln in connection with allegations of bonded and child labour – While accused believed that statements should be recorded at police station, officers wanted to record same on site -According to officers , accused moved labourers and children in a dumper to police station before their statements could be recorded – Accused had earlier allegedly sent a fax to District Magistrate stating that labourers were illegally released due to intervention of kiln owner – Uncontroverted allegations did not disclose use of force or holding out threatening gestures giving rise to an apprehension of use of force towards public servant – Physical movement of labourers would not amount to use of force far less criminal force on a public servant – Fact that appellants were trying to ensure effective investigation, indicated absence of mens rea – Order taking cognizance was liable to be set aside
Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.353— (Paras1213142425)
(B) Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.190, S.195— Cognizance of offence – Prima facie case – Offence of voluntarily obstructing a public servant in discharge of public functions – Accused were members of a social organization, who accompanied a team of Labour Enforcement Officers during inspection of a brick kiln in connection with allegations of bonded and child labour – While accused believed that statements should be recorded at police station, officers wanted to record same on site -According to officers , accused moved labourers and children in a dumper to police station before their statements could be recorded – – Statements of labourers showed that no force was used to take them away and they were promptly released – There was nothing showing intention to impede discharge of official duty – There appeared to be a genuine difference of opinion – Malicious animus of labour officials was evident from documents on record and same indicated that registration of criminal case was a product of malice and personal vendetta – Cognizance of a non-cognizable offence was illegally taken on a police report without obtaining prior sanction and mandatory written complaint from public servant or his superior – Order taking cognizance was liable to be set aside
Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.186— AIR 2025 SC 759-Followed(Paras2728293233)
[ad_1]
Source link