Koshal, J. - (1.) By this judgment we shall dispose of Criminal Appeals Nos. 178 and 248 of 1977, both of which were admitted to a hearing by special leave and in each one of which the sole point for determination is whether a member of an executive committee or a servant of a registered co-operative society is a public servant for the purpose of Cl. (c) of sub-sec. (1) of S. 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Central Act No. 2 of 1947, hereinafter referred to as the 1947 Act) and whether, therefore, a Special Judge appointed under the Criminal Law Amendment Act (Central Act No. 46 of 1952, hereinafter called the 1952 Act) has jurisdiction to try him for an offence under that clause.
(2.) The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 178 of 1977 is M. A. Kochu Devassy who was sent up, along with 11 others, for trial in respect of offences under Ss. 120-B, 408, 465, 467, 477 and 477-A of the I. P. C. (hereinafter described as the Code) and Cl. (c) of sub-sec. (1) read with sub-s. (2) of S. 5 of the 1947 Act to the Special Judge, Trichur by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Department, Trichur. The allegations against the accused were that while being members of the Board of Directors or the servants of Co-operative Society No. R-192, Chalakudy (hereinafter called the Society), they, on the 18th of May 1972, entered into a conspiracy to misappropriate the funds of the society, that in pursuance of that conspiracy they misappropriated a sum of Rs. 1900/- on the same date and that they prepared false records in order to conceal the misappropriation. Before the trial commenced, however, a petition was made on behalf of the accused to the High Court of Kerala praying that the charge be quashed. That petition came up for hearing before Khalid, J., who doubted the correctness of the dictum of a Division Bench of that Court in Sahadevan v. State of Kerala (1976 Ker LT 134) to the effect that a Special Judge has jurisdiction to try all cases against employees of co-operative societies under all or any of the provisions of S. 5 of the 1947, Act. He adverted to various provisions of that Act and the Kerala Criminal Law Amendment Act (Kerala Act 27 of 1962 and hereinafter referred to as the Kerala Act) and thought that an important aspect of the amendment promulgated by the Kerala Act was not brought to the notice of the Division Bench and therefore referred the matter to a larger Bench by an order dated the 7th of Dec., 1976. The petition then came up for final hearing before a Full Bench of the Kerala High Court, which has, by the impugned judgment, held that the dictum of the Division Bench mentioned above was correct, that a member of the executive committee or a servant of a registered co-operative society was a public servant for the purposes of the 1947 Act as a whole in so far as the State of Kerala was concerned and that, therefore, such a member or servant could be tried by a Special Judge. It is by that judgment that the appellant feels aggrieved.
(3.) The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 248 of 1977 is one C. A. Thomas, who was convicted by the Special Judge, Trichur, for offences under Cl. (c) of sub-section (1) read with sub-sec. (2) of S. 5 of the 1947 Act and S. 408 of the Code and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a year and a fine of Rupees 5000/- on the first count, the sentence in default of payment of fine being rigorous imprisonment for six months. No sentence was awarded for the offence under S. 408 of the Code. The allegations on the basis of which he was prosecuted and which were found proved against him were that while being employed as a store-keeper at the firewood depot at Punkunnam owned by the Wholesale Co-operative Consumer Stores Ltd. Trichur, he misappropriated profits accruing to his employers by abusing his official position. He filed an appeal to the High Court of Kerala which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge on the 4th of March 1977 through the judgment impugned before us. The pleas raised before the High Court on his behalf included one that the Special Judge had no jurisdiction to try him inasmuch as he was not a public servant for the purposes of the 1947 Act. The plea was rejected by the High Court in view of the dictum of the Full Bench which is challenged before us in Criminal Appeal No. 178 of 1977.;