The Kerala High Court has firmly ruled that a police officer accused of assaulting a citizen cannot claim immunity under the pretext of carrying out official duties. The case revolves around a Sub-Inspector (SI) from Nilambur Police Station, who allegedly subjected a man to physical abuse following a complaint filed by a woman.
Justice K Babu, dismissing the officer’s plea, questioned how torturing an individual could ever be considered part of police work. “How can we say that the act of a police officer physically torturing a man at the police station is part of his official duty?” the judge remarked, noting that such acts of violence are clearly outside the scope of any lawful duty.
The incident dates back to 2008, when the SI allegedly summoned a man to the station after a woman accused him of verbally abusing her in public. Once at the station, the officer reportedly attacked the man, slamming his head against a wall, kicking him in the abdomen and chest, and punching him. Despite a woman constable at the station attempting to intervene, the assault continued.
Although an Assistant Sub-Inspector initially filed a report against the SI, the case was later dismissed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, who labeled it a “false case.” However, the victim pursued a private complaint, leading to the magistrate taking cognizance of the matter. The SI was subsequently charged under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for obscenity, assault, and wrongful restraint.
The officer’s defense relied on Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), arguing that he was performing official duties and, therefore, was entitled to government sanction before facing prosecution. However, the court ruled in favor of the complainant, stating that the alleged assault was unrelated to the officer’s duties and thus fell outside the protective scope of Section 197.
The High Court also noted that a 1977 government notification, which shields police officers for acts performed in maintaining public order, did not apply in this case. Rejecting the SI’s petition, the court affirmed the magistrate’s decision to charge the officer, marking a significant stand against abuse of power within law enforcement.
