Case Law Details
Santosh Kumar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh High Court)
Conclusion: Registration of FIR against assessee for offence under Section 56 of the Act of 2005 was bad, as no FIR for the said non-cognizable offence could be registered and for offence under Section 56, only complaint could be filed by the specified authority / person named in Section 60(a)/(b), that too cognizance can be taken by the jurisdictional criminal court only if previous sanction has already been granted by the competent authority under Section 59 of the Act of 2005. As such, FIR for the said offence by doctor– in-charge BMO who had not been authorised under Section 60(a) of the Act was totally unauthorised.
Held: Assessee was a Medical Officer appointed by the State Government and he was posted at Community Health Centre, Malkharoda and thereafter, he joined and started working on the post of Medical Officer. Doctor-in-charge of the post of BMO directed assessee to vacate the Government quarter G-1, which he was occupying since 9-9-2019, holding it to be earmarked for the residence of BMO which the assessee suitably replied, but that turned out to a dispute between them and it continued. Meanwhile, the doctor– in-charge BMO directed assessee to join duty in the Isolation and COVID Ward of District Hospital, Janjgir and also submit himself for training, but he could not join on account of personal difficulty, as his daughter became unwell for which he was issued show cause notice, but ultimately, when he could not join his duty, the impugned FIR was registered at the instance of doctor– in-charge BMO, stating that pursuant to the order of the Chief Medical & Health Officer, he was directed to join duty at Isolation and COVID Ward of District Hospital, Janjgir, but he failed to report and non-joining of duty during the time of pandemic COVID-19 was a gross omission and negligence in performance of duty and therefore action be taken against him for his act / omission in not joining duty pursuant to which offence punishable under Section 188 of the IPC and Section 56 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 (for short, ‘the Act of 2005’) had been registered against him. In the instant case, registration of FIR against assessee for offence under Section 56 of the Act of 2005 was bad, as no FIR for the said non-cognizable offence could be registered and for offence under Section 56, only complaint could be filed by the specified authority / person named in Section 60(a)/(b), that too cognizance can be taken by the jurisdictional criminal court only if previous sanction has already been granted by the competent authority under Section 59 of the Act of 2005. As such, FIR for the said offence by doctor– in-charge BMO who had not been authorised under Section 60(a) of the Act was totally unauthorised, that too with regard to some service dispute between assessee and doctor– in-charge BMO. Resultantly, it was held that for the offence punishable under Sections 188 of the IPC and 56 of the Act of 2005, no FIR can be registered under Section 154 of the Code in the light of the legal analysis and discussion made herein-above. Accordingly, FIR No.165/2020 dated 11-6-2020 registered against assessee by Police Station Malkharoda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa for the offences punishable under Sections 188 of the IPC and 56 of the Act of 2005 was hereby quashed.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
1. The petitioner herein seeks quashment of FIR No. 165/2020, registered at Police Station Malkharoda for the offence punishable under Section 188 of the IPC and Section 56 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 on the following factual backdrop :–
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
