AIR 2016 SC 2090 ::2016 CRI. L. J. 2658 ::AIR 2016 SC( Cri) 758 ::(2016) 2 CriLR(Raj) 579 ::(2016) 2 DLT(CRL) 674 ::(2016) 2 CurCriR 231 ::(2016) 2 AllCriR 1606 ::2016 CriLR(SC&MP) 579 ::(2016) 3 Pat LJR 145 ::2016 (12) SCC 87 ::(2016) 2 Mad LJ(Cri) 682 ::(2016) 2 RecCriR 876 ::(2016) 4 Scale 348 ::2016 CriLR(SC MAH GUJ) 579 ::(2016) 3 AllCriLR 35 ::(2016) 2 Crimes 94 ::(2017) 2 Mh LJ (Cri) 401 ::(2016) 64 OCR 380 ::(2016) 2 UC 992 ::(2016) 163 AllIndCas 249 (SC) ::(2016) 95 AllCriC 458

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Punjab and Haryana)

Hon'ble Judge(s): V. Gopala Gowda, Arun Mishra , JJ

Punjab Disturbed Areas Act (32 of 1983) , S.6— Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.197— (as amended in 1989) - Sanction to prosecute Police Officers - Necessity - Stage of framing of charge - Prosecution case of fake encounter or death caused by torture - Trial Court to prima facie proceed, without sanction from Central Govt. on basis of prosecution version - Court shall re-examine question of sanction from evidence adduced by prosecution or accused that there was reasonable nexus of incident with discharge of official duty. In the instant cases, the allegation as per the prosecution case it was a case of fake encounter or death caused by torture whereas the defence of the accused person is that it was a case in discharge of official duty and as the deceased was involved in the terrorist activities and while maintaining law and order the incident has taken place. The incident was in the course of discharge of official duty. Held, in case version of the prosecution is found to be correct there is no requirement of any sanction. However, it would be open to the accused persons to adduce the evidence in defence and to submit such other materials on record indicating that the incident has taken place in discharge of their official duties and the orders passed earlier would not come in the way of the trial Court to decide the question afresh or even at the time of conc....