9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether employees of a nationalized Bank can be considered 'public servants' under Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Whether the delay in the trial process warrants quashing of the prosecution. Analysis: 1. The primary issue in this case revolves around determining whether employees of a nationalized Bank can be classified as 'public servants' under Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. The respondent, a Branch Manager of Bank of India, faced charges under various sections of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The respondent contended that he was not a 'public servant' and thus could not be tried by a Special Court. The Calcutta High Court, relying on a previous judgment, quashed the prosecution, stating that the respondent did not fall under the definition of a 'public servant.' However, the Supreme Court, in a detailed analysis, established that nationalized banks are 'Corporations' established by a Central Act and owned and controlled by the Central Government. Therefore, employees of such banks, including the respondent, are deemed 'public servants' under Section 21 of the IPC. 2. The second issue pertains to the delay in the trial process and whether it justifies quashing the prosecution. The respondent argued that the delay in the case, which began in 1985, warranted quashing of the prosecution due to the right to a speedy trial being a fundamental right. However, the Supreme Court disagreed, noting that the delay was not solely attributable to the prosecution but that the respondent had also significantly contributed to it. The Court emphasized that the respondent could not benefit from his own actions causing delay and use the right to a speedy trial as a shield to escape prosecution. Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of allowing the trial to proceed expeditiously, setting aside the High Court's judgment and directing the trial court to conclude the case promptly. In conclusion, the Supreme Court clarified the status of employees of nationalized banks as 'public servants' under Section 21 of the IPC and rejected the plea to quash the prosecution based on delay, emphasizing the importance of concluding the trial efficiently.
|
