Prior Sanction Required For Referring A Complaint Against Public Servants For Investigation U/S 156(3) CrPC:...
Prior sanction before referring a complaint against public servants for investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC,
1. Section 156(3) CrPC – Overview
Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 states:
“Any Magistrate empowered under Section 190 may order an investigation by the police into a cognizable offence even if the police have not yet registered a case.”
Key Point:
This provision allows a magistrate to direct the police to investigate a cognizable offence, but it does not automatically bypass other statutory requirements, such as prior sanction under specific laws.
2. Prior Sanction Requirement for Public Servants
Certain public servants, especially those holding positions in government or quasi-government departments, are protected under special statutes, e.g.:
Section 197 CrPC – Protection of public servants from prosecution for acts done in the discharge of official duties.
Other sectoral laws – For example, Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, requires sanction by the competent authority before initiating prosecution against a public servant.
Implications:
Even if a magistrate directs investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC, the police cannot register an FIR or start formal prosecution against a public servant without obtaining prior sanction from the competent authority.
This ensures that malicious or frivolous complaints do not impede the functioning of public officers.
3. Important Case Laws
a) Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of UP, (2014) 2 SCC 1
Facts: Guidelines were issued for registration of FIRs for cognizable offences.
Relevance: The Supreme Court held that FIRs must be registered immediately for cognizable offences. However, it recognized that if the complaint involves a public servant, prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC is required before prosecution.
Key Point: Magistrates can direct investigation, but police cannot act against public servants without sanction.
b) R.K. Jain v. State of Haryana, (2003) 11 SCC 1
Facts: A complaint was filed against police officers for alleged misconduct.
Held: Before initiating prosecution against police officers (or other public servants), sanction under Section 197 CrPC is mandatory.
Principle: Directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC does not remove the statutory requirement for sanction.
c) K. R. Verma v. Union of India, AIR 1991 SC 2120
Held: Prior sanction is a jurisdictional requirement. Any investigation or prosecution initiated without it is invalid and illegal.
Implication: Even if a magistrate orders investigation, acting against a public servant without sanction is null and void.
4. Practical Procedure
Complaint received against a public servant.
Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC may direct police to investigate.
Police identify the involvement of a public servant.
Police approach the competent authority for prior sanction (e.g., Government, Head of Department).
Investigation and prosecution can only proceed after sanction is granted.
Without sanction, any FIR registered or prosecution initiated is liable to be quashed by courts.
5. Key Takeaways
Section 156(3) CrPC allows a magistrate to direct investigation against any cognizable offence, but cannot bypass statutory protections for public servants.
Prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC or other laws is mandatory for investigation/prosecution against public servants.
Case law consistently holds that acting without sanction renders the investigation or prosecution illegal and null.
RELATED Blog
0 comments