Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Shailesh Ramanlal Mahimtura, a highly qualified structural engineer with three decades of experience, was appointed as a member of the High Rise Committee constituted by the Government of Maharashtra via a Government Resolution in 2007. The committee was tasked with scrutinizing development proposals for buildings exceeding 70 meters in height. The applicant was not a government employee and did not receive any salary or remuneration from the government for his services. In 2010, a complaint was filed by one Pankaj Goshar with the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) alleging corruption. The ACB registered a case under Sections 7, 12, 13(c)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and after investigation, filed a charge-sheet. The applicant filed an application before the Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Mumbai, seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings on the ground that he was not a 'public servant' under the PC Act. The Special Judge rejected the application on 17th January 2014. Aggrieved, the applicant approached the Bombay High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The core legal issue was whether the applicant could be termed a 'public servant' within the meaning of Section 2(c)(viii) of the PC Act. The court analyzed the definition of 'public servant' under Section 2(c)(viii), which includes any person who holds an office by virtue of which he is authorized or required to perform any public duty. The court noted that the applicant was not in the service or pay of the government, nor did he hold any office under the government. His appointment was as an expert member on a technical committee, which was advisory in nature. The court held that the term 'office' implies a position with certain duties and authority, not merely a temporary assignment. The applicant's role did not involve any governmental authority or decision-making power; he was merely providing technical expertise. The court distinguished between a 'public servant' and an 'expert' appointed for specific technical advice. The court also referred to the definition of 'public duty' under Section 2(b) of the PC Act, which includes duties performed in the discharge of functions of the government or local authority. The court found that the applicant's duties were not governmental functions but technical advisory services. Consequently, the court allowed the application, quashed the criminal proceedings against the applicant, and set aside the order of the Special Judge. The court held that continuing the prosecution would be an abuse of process of law.
Headnote
A) Prevention of Corruption Act - Public Servant - Definition under Section 2(c)(viii) - Expert Committee Member - The applicant, a structural engineer, was appointed as a member of the High Rise Committee constituted by the Government of Maharashtra to scrutinize development proposals of buildings over 70 meters. He was not in the service or pay of the government, nor did he hold an office under the government. The court held that such an appointment does not make him a 'public servant' under Section 2(c)(viii) of the PC Act, as the committee was advisory and the applicant did not exercise any statutory or governmental power. (Paras 3-30) B) Prevention of Corruption Act - Public Servant - 'Office' under Government - The term 'office' under Section 2(c)(viii) implies a position with certain duties and authority, not merely a temporary assignment. The applicant's role as a committee member was advisory and did not involve any governmental authority or decision-making power. The court distinguished between a 'public servant' and an 'expert' appointed for specific technical advice. (Paras 15-25) C) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of Proceedings - The court allowed the application under Section 482 CrPC to quash the criminal proceedings against the applicant, as the essential ingredient of being a 'public servant' was not satisfied. The court held that continuing the prosecution would be an abuse of process of law. (Paras 30-35)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a structural engineer appointed as a member of a High Rise Committee constituted by the Government of Maharashtra can be termed a 'public servant' within the meaning of Section 2(c)(viii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Final Decision
The application is allowed. The order dated 17th January 2014 passed by the learned Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Mumbai in Special Case No. 90/2010 is set aside. The criminal proceedings against the applicant in Special Case No. 90/2010 are quashed.
Law Points
- Definition of public servant under Section 2(c)(viii) of Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988
- Interpretation of 'office' and 'duty'
- Expert committee members not holding salary or post under government
