Criminal Revision No.815 of 2007(O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Revision No.815 of 2007(O&M) Date of Decision: September 27, 2011 State of Haryana ... Petitioner Versus Davender Singh ... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr.Satyavir Singh Yadav, DAG, Haryana for the petitioner – State. Mr.Jagjeet Beniwal, Advocate for the respondent. NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL) By filing this revision, the State of Haryana has challenged the order dated December 06th, 2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, whereby, he discharged Davender Singh – accused/ respondent in case bearing First Information Report No.296 dated December 16th, 2005, under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station City Narnaul. Prosecution was launched on the statement of Shish Ram. He applied for a loan of Rs.80,000/- for the repair of his tube- well from Primary Cooperative Agricultural and Land Development Bank, Narnaul (herein referred as `the Bank'). Accused was working as Land Valuation Officer in the Bank. He demanded an amount of Rs.4500/- as illegal gratification from the complainant in order to make the payment of loan amount to him. Complainant filed a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Narnaul, who sent the same to Deputy Superintendent of Police. The DSP formed a raiding party, consisting the complainant, Ashok Kumar and Rajender Singh Naib Tehsildar. The currency notes worth Rs.4400/- were handed over by the complainant to the raiding party. Phenolphthalein power was applied on the notes and the same were returned to the Criminal Revision No.815 of 2007(O&M) [ 2 ] complainant. The said amount was paid by complainant to the accused and immediately on raid, the amount was recovered from the pocket of the accused. Accordingly, he was challaned. Learned Additional Sessions Judge discharged him only on the short ground that he being an employee of the cooperative bank was not a public servant and as such, he could not be prosecuted under Section 13-D of the Act. Learned State counsel has placed on record a letter dated March 11th, 2011 (Annexure P1) written by Branch Manager of the Bank, wherein, it is mentioned that Land Development Bank is controlled by the Government of Haryana. It has also been stated that Government has its share in the Bank. Since, Government has its share in the Bank and controls the same, it means that the Bank is being aided by the Government. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case Govt. of Andhra Pradesh vs. P.Venku Reddy, 2002(4) RCR (Criminal) 557 has held that an employee of a Cooperative Bank, which is controlled and aided by the Government, is a `public servant'. This Court relying upon the aforesaid judgment in cases (i) Surender Singh vs. State of Haryana, Criminal Revision No.1031 of 2009 decided on February 10th, 2011, and (ii) Akhtar Hussain vs. State of Haryana, Criminal Misc.No.M-12693 of 2011, also held that an employee of a cooperative bank, which is controlled and aided by the Government, is a public servant. Above being the legal position, the revision petition is accepted. The order, under challenge, is set aside, and the Trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial, in accordance with law. September 27, 2011 ( NAWAB SINGH ) `gian' JUDGE