S KOMARAIAH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner assails the order, dated 8.11.1999 passed by the learned Principal Special Judge for SPE and ACB cases, Hyderabad, in Crl. M.P. No.294 of 1994 in C.C.No.26of l994.

(2.) The respondent-Anti-Corruption Bureau represented by its Inspector, C.I.U., A.C.B., Hyderabad, laid the charge-sheet against the revision petitioner alleging inter alia that the petitioner is the Zonal Manager of the A.P. State Co-operative Bank Limited, a society registered under the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 ('the A.P.C.S. Act' for brevity), and the said Bank has been receiving financial assistance from A.P. State Government under Section 43 of the A.P.C.S. Act. He was holding the post of Secretary upto 1981 which was redesignated as Zonal Manager from 1981 onwards, involving the same duties of advancing loans and recovery of the same While working in various capacities the petitioner acquired various movable and immovable assets to the tune of Rs.17,61,142/- which are disproportionate to his known sources of income for which he was not able to explain satisfactorily and, therefore, committed the offence punishable under Section 13(l)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('the P.C. Act' for brevity).

(3.) Pursuant to the summonses issued by the Court, the petitioner appeared before the Special Court and when the case was coming up for consideration as to whether the charge could be framed, he filed a petition seeking discharge. It is averred inter alia in the said petition that the petitioner is not a public servant being an employee of the A.P. State Co-operative Bank Limited. The said Bank is being governed by an elected Board of Directors or Managing Committee by its members and is being run with the interest and/or profits from the loans and advances given to various categories of loanees and that the said Bank borrows from the NABARD and there has been no aid or grant of financial assistance from the Central or State Government and, therefore, he being not an elected President, Secretary, or other office bearer of the said society, is not a public servant as defined under Section 2(c)(ix) of the P.C. Act. It is further averred that the assets acquired prior to 9.9.1988 on which date the P.C. Act of 1988 came into force cannot be considered for the purpose of knowing as to whether the petitioner is a public servant within the definition of Section 2(c) of the P.C. Act. The case of the petitioner, therefore, shall have to be considered under Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code ('the I.P.C.' for brevity) inasmuch as the P.C. Act, 1947 adopted the definition of "public servant" as given under Section 21 of the I.P.C. and, therefore, the petitioner cannot be treated as a public servant under Section 21 of the I.P.C.