Wednesday 30 October 2024

Supreme Court: Shouting and threatening public servant does not amount to assault punishable U/S 353 of IPC

It is on the basis of the above complaint that an

FIR has been lodged against the appellant.   However,

the only allegation against the appellant in the said

complaint is that he was shouting and threatening the

staff. This itself will not amount to any assault. 

Assault is defined under Section 353 of the Indian

Penal Code as under :­

“353 Assault  ­   Whoever   makes   any

gesture,   or   any   preparation   intending   or

knowing it to be likely that such gesture or

preparation will cause any person present

to   apprehend   that   he   who   makes   that

gesture   or   preparation   is   about   to   use

criminal   force   to   that   person,   is   said   to

commit an assault.”

We   have   reproduced   the   entire   complaint

hereinabove.   On perusing the same, we find that none

of the ingredients, as mentioned in Section 353 IPC, is

reflected in the complaint letter. In other words, no

offence under Section 353 IPC is made out in this case.

The High Court, to our mind, has committed a mistake

in not interfering in this case. This is a case which is

nothing   but   an   abuse   of   the   process   of   law   and

therefore, in order to meet the ends of justice, we allow

this appeal and quash the entire proceedings initiated

against the appellant.   

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL  No. ___________ OF 2024

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 5905/2022 ]

K. DHANANJAY        Vs CABINET SECRETARY & ORS.            Dated: OCTOBER 21, 2024.

Leave granted.

  The appellant was an employee of Indian Institute

of   Astrophysics   (Autonomous   Institute   under   the

Department of Science and Technology, Govt. of India)

in Bangalore. Challenging his dismissal from service, he

had filed a petition before the Central Administrative

Tribunal at Bangalore Bench.

Meanwhile, the appellant wanted to peruse certain

documents,   for   which   permission   was   given   to   him.

While he was inspecting the documents in the office of

Respondent No. 5 ­ Ms. A. Thomeena, Deputy Registrar,

Central   Administrative   Tribunal   at   Visveswarayya

Kendriya Bhawan, Bangalore, it was alleged that the

appellant assaulted the officers and therefore, a case

was lodged against him under Sections 353/506 of the

Indian   Penal   Code.     His   petition   for   quashing   the

proceedings has been dismissed and he is before this

Court.

Vide   order   dated   27.08.2024,   this   Court   issued

notice to the respondents, including Respondent No. 5 –

Ms. A. Thomeena, but no one has entered appearance

on behalf of the respondents despite due service.  

We have now perused the copy of the complaint

which   was   given   by   Respondent   No.   5   –   Ms.   A.

Thomeena, Deputy Registrar to the Inspector of Police,

Ulsoor Police Station, Bangalore.   The same reads as

under :­

“Sir,

Today at 3.05 PM, we had one incident in

our office.   One Shri Dhananjay who had

been a party to the proceedings before us

had   filed   a   complaint   before   the   Chief

Information   Commission   seeking   certain

documents.     The   CIC   vide   order   No.

CIC/CAD/MT/A/2018/611756/SD   dated

01.07.2019   and   asked   us   to   give   some

documents.   We had kept every document

ready and asked him to come and get it

and   inspect   the   document   which   he

wanted.  

But   apparently   he   wanted   some   other

documents also which we felt had nothing

to do with the order of the CIC.  Therefore,

being an official document, we had refused.

Thereupon   he   started   shouting   and

threatening us.  At that time Smt. Rajashri,

CPIO, Smt. Rekhashree, who is my PS, and

Smt. Geetha who is an MTS were in the

room.  He threatening and shouted at them

and   disrupted   the   work   of   the   office.

Hearing   the   shouts   and   cries,   people

around   gathered   and   I   had   immediately

informed the police.  

Kindly take necessary action.”

It is on the basis of the above complaint that an

FIR has been lodged against the appellant.   However,

the only allegation against the appellant in the said

complaint is that he was shouting and threatening the

staff. This itself will not amount to any assault. 

Assault is defined under Section 353 of the Indian

Penal Code as under :­

“353 Assault  ­   Whoever   makes   any

gesture,   or   any   preparation   intending   or

knowing it to be likely that such gesture or

preparation will cause any person present

to   apprehend   that   he   who   makes   that

gesture   or   preparation   is   about   to   use

criminal   force   to   that   person,   is   said   to

commit an assault.”

We   have   reproduced   the   entire   complaint

hereinabove.  On perusing the same, we find that none

of the ingredients, as mentioned in Section 353 IPC, is

reflected in the complaint letter. In other words, no

offence under Section 353 IPC is made out in this case.

The High Court, to our mind, has committed a mistake

in not interfering in this case. This is a case which is

nothing   but   an   abuse   of   the   process   of   law   and

therefore, in order to meet the ends of justice, we allow

this appeal and quash the entire proceedings initiated

against the appellant.   

Withe the above observations and directions, the

appeal is allowed.  

Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are

disposed of.

.......………..………............J.

               [ SUDHANSHU DHULIA ]

.……….........………...........J.

               [ AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ]

New Delhi;

OCTOBER 21, 2024.


Print Page

No comments:

Post a Comment