TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was necessary before taking cognizance of complaints alleging defamation based on statements made in a counter-affidavit filed by public servants in proceedings concerning official action.
Analysis: Section 197 bars cognizance unless the alleged offence was committed by a public servant while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of official duty. The test is whether there is a reasonable connection between the act complained of and the official duty, so that the public servant can fairly claim that the act was done by virtue of office. Statements made in a counter-affidavit filed in defence of official action, even if complained of as defamatory, may fall within that protection if they are closely connected with the official decision or action under challenge. On the facts, the impugned averments were made only in answer to the writ petition concerning transfer and were directly connected with the official function being defended.
Conclusion: Sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was required, and the criminal proceedings were liable to be quashed.
Final Conclusion: The complaints could not proceed without prior sanction because the statements forming the basis of prosecution were reasonably connected with the discharge of official duty.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the act complained of has a reasonable nexus with an official duty, and the impugned statement is made in the course of defending official action, previous sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is a condition precedent to cognizance.
TaxTMI 
