HANUMAN PRASAD KACHHAWA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused-petitioner, who at the relevant time was working as Managing Director in the Ajmer Urban Cooperative Bank, Ajmer, has preferred this criminal revision petition under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.RC. against the order dated 30.10.2013 passed by the Special Judge, Anti Corruption Cases, Ajmer in Criminal Case No.3/2012 whereby the learned Court below has ordered to frame charge against the petitioner for the offence under Sec. 13(1)(e) read with Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) mainly on the ground that the petitioner is not a "public servant" within the meaning of Sec. 2(c) of the Act.

(2.) The petitioner has been prosecuted and charge-sheet has been filed against him for the aforesaid offence on the premise that the petitioner in his entire service period earned an amount of Rs. 41,63,777/- by way of salary out of which an amount of Rs. 13,31,272/- was expended by him, but at the relevant time assets of the value of Rs. 1,18,76,954/-were found in his possession and thus, the petitioner had in his possession properties valuing more than Rs. 90,44,449.00 which is disproportionate to his known source of income for which no satisfactory explanation or account could be furnished by the petitioner. At the time of framing of the charge also it was submitted on behalf of the petitioner before the learned trial Court that the petitioner is not a "public servant" and, therefore, he cannot be charged under the provisions of the Act, but the same was negatived by the learned trial Court on the basis of provisions of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act as well as certain clauses of the bye-laws framed by the Ajmer Urban Cooperative Bank Limited and it was held that prima facie the petitioner is a public servant.

(3.) In support of the petition, learned counsel for the petitioner raised the following grounds:-