Criminal Revision No. 668 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 668 of 2009 Date of Decision: 23.3.2009 Baldev Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. A.P.S. Deol, Senior Advocate with Mr. Davinder Bir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A.S. Jatana, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Issue notice of motion. On the asking of the Court Mr. A.S. Jatana, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the State. A copy of petition has been supplied to him. Petitioner was employed as a Secretary of the Peori Co- operative Agriculture Service Society Limited. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Annexure P4 to state that the Peori Co-operative Agriculture Service Society Limited had not received any funds from the Government and, therefore, petitioner cannot be termed as public servant. Section 2(c)(1)(ix) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, read as under:- Criminal Revision No. 668 of 2009 2 “(ix) any person who is the president, secretary or other office-bearer of a registered co-operative society engaged in agriculture, industry, trade or banking, receiving or having received any financial aid from the Central Government or a State Government or from any corporation established by or under a Central, Provincial or State Act, or any authority or body owned or controlled or aided by the Government or a Government company as defined in section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956”. A perusal of this clause show that any employee or office bearer of Co-operative Society, as before he can be termed as public servant, prosecution has to discharge the onus that such Co-operative Society is receiving or has received any financial aid from the following:- a) Central Government or State Government; b) from any Corporation established by or under a Central, Provincial or State Act, for example which may include MARKFED, Mandi Board or any other such organizations; c) or any authority or body owned or controlled or aided by the Government; d) or Government company as defined in Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. Counsel for the petitioner has emphatically stated that the Peori Co-operative Agriculture Service Society had not received any aid Criminal Revision No. 668 of 2009 3 from Central Government or the State Government or from any of the organizations which has been mentioned in clauses (a) to (d). Whether such financial aid has been received from the above said instrumentalities of the State or not, is a question of fact. Therefore, the trial Court is directed that before to proceed with the trial, to call necessary witnesses as Court witnesses to determine this fact. Auditors of the Co-operative Society, officials from the Registrar Co-operative Societies or person concerned with accounts or any other official which in the opinion of the trial Court can throw light be examined at first instance. Prosecution be also given liberty to make an application for examining any other person as Court witness to arrive at this essential issue. It is common knowledge that Co-operative Societies can be formulated by various persons and they may not receive any financial aid from the State. If the aid is not received from the instrumentalities defined in Section, the said officials of such Society cannot be termed as public servant. With the observations made above, the present petition is disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge March 23, 2009 “DK”