Find a Lawyer

Criminal Acquittal Appeals Nos. 264, 267, 268, 269 and 271 of 1980, decided on 1st September, 1983.

‑‑‑S. 417‑‑‑Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act (XL of 1958), S.2(b)‑ Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.21‑‑West Pakistan Road Transport Workers Ordinance (XXVIII of 1961)‑‑West Pakistan Road Transport Workers Rules, 1962‑‑Employee of Karachi Road Transport Corporation, controlled and administered by Federal Government, held, 'public servants'‑‑Special Judge appointed under Act of 1958 had jurisdiction to take cognizance and proceed with cases under scheduled offences, against such employees‑‑Magistrate appointed by Provincial Government to try offences of employees of Karachi Road Transport Corporation, held further, had no jurisdiction to take cognizance in respect of scheduled offences‑ Appeal against acquittal dismissed.

Saeed A. Shaikh, A.‑G. for the State.

Respondent in person.

Mazhar Ali Chohan, for Respondent (in Criminal Acquittal Appeal No. 267 of 1980).

Dates of hearing: 31st August and 1st September, 1983.

.‑‑We propose to dispose of these appeals by this judgment as common question is involved in all the matters. The State has filed these acquittal appeals against the judgment of the learned Sessions judge, Karachi acquitting the respondents by setting aside the conviction awarded by the Magistrate of Mobile Court of Karachi Road Transport Corporation (K . R . T . C .).

Briefly, the facts as stated by the appellant are, that the Karachi Road Transport Corporation is a private Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1913 engaged in transport business at Karachi from 1977. The affairs of the said Company are regulated under its memorandum and articles of association. It has been stated, that this Company is purely a private limited Company and the conditions of service of its workers and employees are governed under the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 and Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968. It has further been stated that the Company is not created under any statute and its workers are subject to the provisions of the Road Transport Workers Act, 1961 and West Pakistan Road Transport Workers Rules, 1962. The respondents in all the appeals are employees of the Company working as conductors.

By Notification No. Sc‑V(S&GAD)23‑1‑XXIV/76, dated 12th March, 1977, the Government of Sind placed the services of an Assistant Commissioner at the disposal of K.R.T.C, for appointment as Mobile Magistrate. Earlier by another Notification No. (116) SCJ/76, dated 26‑7‑1976 he was invested with the powers of Magistrate First Class in Karachi District to try cases summarily under section 260, Cr.P.C. the offences specified in the fourth schedule to the said Code. The road staff of the Karachi Road Transport Corporation made raids on the buses and found that the respondents had not issued tickets to the passengers. The Magistrate of Mobile Court took cognizance of the offences under section 403, P.P.C. and awarded them punishment to pay a fine or in default undergo simple imprisonment. The respondents preferred appeals before the learned Sessions Judge, who set aside the sentence and conviction awarded by the learned Magistrate on the ground, that as the respondents are public servants, no cognizance could be taken by the Magistrate.

Mr. Saeed A. Sheikh the learned Advocate‑General has appeared on behalf of the appellant and has very fairly conceded that the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge is unassailable.

It is an admitted position, that Karachi Road 'transport Corporation though incorporated under the Companies Act is controlled by the Federal Government. The Chairman, the Vice‑Chairman of the Board of Directors and Managing Director are to be appointed by the Federal Government. The three directors according to the Articles of Association are appointed in the proportion of two by the Federal Government and one by the Government of Sind and they hold office during the pleasure of the respective Governments. This clearly shows that the Federal Government is in full control of the Company. In this background, we will now examine the legislative provisions to determine whether the employees of Karachi Road Transport Corporation are 'public servant'.

By virtue of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act (Act XL of 1958) Special Judges were to be appointed by notification to exclusively try offences specified in the schedule to the Act. Under the schedule, offence punishable under section 103, P.P.C. when committed by any public servant is to be tried by the Special Judge. Act XL of 1958 originally defined 'public servant' as follows:‑---

"Section 2(b).‑‑Public Servants means a public servant as defined in section 21 of the Pakistan Penal Code."

Section 21 has specified 11 categories of employees as public servants but employees of Karachi Road Transport do not fall within that definition: The definition of 'Public Servant' as given in Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958 (Act XL of 1958) was amended by Anti‑Corruption Laws (Amendment) Act, 1965 (Act XII of 1965) as follows:‑‑

"Section 2(b).‑‑ Public Servant mean public servant as defined in section 21 of the Pakistan Penal Code and includes an employee of any Corporation or other body or organization set up by the Central Government."

Again, by Prevention of Corruption Laws (Amendment) Ordinance, 1977 (Ordinance V of 1977) and Prevention of Corruption Laws (Amendment Act 1977 (Act XIII of 1977) the Pakistan Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1958 (Act XL of 1958) was amended whereby the definition of 'public servant' was modified which reads as follows:‑

"2(b).‑‑ Public Servants means a public servant as defined in section 21 of the Pakistan Penal Code and includes an employee of any Corporation or other body or Organization set up controlled or administered by, or under the authority of the Central Government."

From the definition it is clear that any employee of any corporation set up, controlled or administered by or under the authority of the Federal Government is a public servant. The employee of Karachi Road Transport Corporation, which is controlled and administered by the Federal Government is a public servant and, therefore, the Special Judge appointed under the Act XL of 1958 above has jurisdiction to take cognizance and proceed with the cases under the scheduled offences. In the face of this legal position, the Magistrate appointed by the Sind Government to try offences of the employees of Karachi Road Transport Corporation had no jurisdiction to take cognizance in respect of the scheduled offences. The learned Sessions Judge has rightly allowed the appeals and set aside the conviction passed by the Magistrate. All the appeals are dismissed.

S.A./3126/K Appeals dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.