Judgment A. P. Sinha, J. 1. This application is directed against the order dated 17-5-1983 taking cognizance. for offences under Sections 500 and 504 of the indian Penal Code. The complainant happens to be a Sub-Inspector of Police. On the relevant date he had gone to Sadar Hospital at Biharsharif in connection with a case. He was just talking to one Rajendra Babu regarding certain postmortem examination. Rajendra Babu had told the Sub-Inspector that the doctor who had done the post-mortem examination, meaning thereby the petitioner was himself present sitting and, therefore, if necessary, he should make query from him. Further, from the complaint petition it appears that earlier the sub-Inspector had made certain query in regard to the post-mortem, but that had remained unanswered and, therefore, he thought it advisable to go personally in the hospital. 2. When the Sub-Inspector was just at the point of asking question from this petitioner, he stood from his chair and abused the complainant by saying that he was not bound to give reply of letter to such dishonest police officer and further stated that all Darogas are dishonest. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has mainly confined his argument on the appreciation of the facts involved in this case and has stated that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case sanction for prosecution of the petitioner under Sec.197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was must and further that the allegations put forward against the petitioner apparently appear to be such which cannot be accepted. 4. It may be appreciated that the plea of the complainant is that when his query remained unanswered, he decided to go to the hospital and he was questioning the doctor. That does not appear to be convincing. After all, he had to proceed in accordance with certain procedure adopted in such cases. If according to him, there was some ambiguity in the post-mortem or post-mortem report which required some clarification, he ought to have done it in writing because that would have been a very important document at the time of trial. If the letter of the Sub-Inspector remained unanswered, instead of going to the hospital, he ought to have written a letter to the Civil Surgeon or the Superintendent of the hospital concerned asking for clarification and should not have confronted the doctor. If the letter of the Sub-Inspector remained unanswered, instead of going to the hospital, he ought to have written a letter to the Civil Surgeon or the Superintendent of the hospital concerned asking for clarification and should not have confronted the doctor. That is the reason that such confrontation has created complication and it is difficult to adjudicate who in fact had stated what in that background. 5. If the Sub-Inspector wanted some searching questions casting doubt upon the post-mortem report and that too by verbal query, the doctor, if he had lost temper, that cannot be said to be abnormal. Moreover, it may be appreciated that absolutely no complaint of this fact had been lodged to any of the superior authority of the hospital, whatsoever by the Sub-Inspector. 6. Moreover, it appears that the Sub-Inspector had gone to the hospital during the working hours and the petitioner who was in the chamber was supposed to be on duty. It also appears that the talk in between the petitioner and the complainant was in connection with the post-mortem report which is said to be a creation of the petitioner while on duty. Of course, the utterances cannot be said to be permissible, but as indicated above, it appears that the sub-Inspector had tried to confront the doctor-petitioner and thus some incident took place. In this view of the matter, the taking of sanction cannot be said to be totally irrelevant. Considering all these facts and circumstances, I am of opinion, that a case has been made out for setting aside the impugned order taking cognizance against the petitioner. 7. Thus the application is allowed and the impugned order taking cognizance against the petitioner is hereby set aside. Application allowed.