'Attempt to Harass': Patna High Court Quashes Assault Case Against Bettiah Ex-DM

The bench of Justice Sourendra Pandey, on September 4, 2025, allowed Kumar’s plea seeking to set aside the order of a Bettiah magistrate that had taken cognizance of offences including assault, wrongful confinement, defamation and promoting enmity under Sections 295A, 298, 323, 342, 427, 500 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

In August 2008, communal tensions gripped Bettiah in Bihar’s West Champaran district over disputes relating to religious flags and land use. For years, Hindus and Muslims had used the disputed site for religious events like Tazia processions during Muharram and the Mahaviri flag observance linked to Lord Hanuman. The arrangement collapsed when members of the Hindu community sought to install a permanent idol of Hanuman, a move opposed by local Muslims. In the violence that followed, a Mahaviri flag was torn and a mosque in the village was vandalised.

The state administration, on instructions from the Home Department, had convened a Peace Committee meeting to defuse the crisis. It was at this meeting, complainant Brajraj Srivastava who is an advocate practicing at Bettiah Civil Court alleged that Dilip Kumar abused and manhandled him, tore his shirt collar, and had him wrongfully detained.

Srivastava further claimed that he was assaulted at the police station and remanded to custody under the DM’s instructions. Nearly a week after being released from jail, he filed a complaint leading to the 2024 order summoning Kumar to face trial.

Kumar, represented by senior advocate Mriganka Datta, maintained that the allegations were concocted to “settle scores” after Srivastava was himself arrested for disrupting communal harmony. He argued that he had acted solely in his official capacity as District Magistrate to maintain law and order, a position that required sanction from the government before prosecution under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. No such sanction had been obtained.

The High Court found merit in these arguments. It noted that contemporaneous records, including medical examinations and judicial remand orders, did not support the complainant’s version of being assaulted. Instead, evidence suggested that Srivastava had been arrested for his own role in disturbing peace during a highly volatile communal situation.

Justice Pandey observed that the complaint was filed only after Srivastava’s release from custody, making it “an afterthought driven by vengeance.” He further stressed that exposing officers to such malicious prosecutions would deter them from performing their duties in sensitive law-and-order situations.

"The petitioner was performing his duty as District Magistrate of Bettiah, a town reeling under communal clashes between two communities as such in any case, the actions attributed to the petitioner, even if assumes on their face, are integrally connected with the discharge of his official function as a District Magistrate (petitioner) in the context of maintaining law and order," court said. 

Court further emphasised that it is a well settled law that when such allegations pertain to acts purportedly done in discharge of official duty, no cognizance can be taken by the Magistrate against a public servant without obtaining the previous sanction of the Competent Authority, as mandated under Section 197 of the Cr.P.C.

"The absence of such sanctions, therefore, render the order taking cognizance against the accused public servant is unsustainable in law," court held. 

Therefore, observing that the ex-DM was carrying out preventive measures to defuse tension between two communities, court held that the continuation of criminal proceedings without the requisite sanction would amount to abuse of process of law.

Court added that the complaint was filed not out of any genuine grievance, but to personally harass the former District Magistrate.

Accordingly, court quashed the Bettiah magistrate’s order of August 13, 2024, bringing an end to criminal proceedings pending against Kumar since 2008.

Case Title: Dilip Kumar vs. The State of Bihar and Another

Order Date: September 4, 2025

Bench: Justice Sourendra Pandey