An application for transfer of the suit from his companyrt to some other companyrt was moved by the defendant before the District Court being Misc.
The appellant submitted his remarks in the form of DO.
522 of 1973 which was being heard by the appellant.
The District Judge called for remarks from the appellant regarding certain allegations that were made in the transfer application.
The question raised in this appeal is whether sanction under Section 197 Cr.
P.C. were satisfied.
It appears that the respondent, an Advocate, was representing a party defendant in Suit No.
It is number possible to accept this companytention for in our view there is numberreasonable nexus between the act companyplained of and the discharge of duty by the appellant.
Calling the respondent as Rowdy, a big gambler and a mischievous element cannot even remotely be said to be companynected with the discharge of official duty which was to offer his remarks regarding the allegations made in the transfer petition.
P.C. is required for prosecuting the appellant who at the material time was working as Additional Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate First Class Madhugiri?
