State Govt response sought on use of PCA

The first bench comprising Justice AP Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad before whom the plea came, said “Since the issue is clearly a jurisdictional, let the State government file a response within two weeks on the question so raised to be answered by this bench before any complications arise.”

The contention raised is that the impugned circular issued by the Registrar contradicts the intent and purpose of the definition of ‘public servant’ as defined under Section 2 © of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The counsel placing arguments in this regard invited the attention of the court to section 2©(IX) of the Act to contend that unless the Co-operative society is engaged in receiving or having received any financial aid from either the Central or State Government there cannot be an extension of the said provision to a cooperative society, which is otherwise neither aided nor is receiving any financial aid from the Central or State Government.

Hence, the prevention of corruption Act cannot be invoked for prosecuting the president or secretary or office bearer of a cooperative society even if registered, counsel argued.

He also submitted that the provision which is penal in nature cannot be pressed into service beyond the limits as prescribed in the statute and consequently the circulardeserves to be struck down. The plea is posted to November 25 forfurther hearing.