1989 PLP 471 (PLC)

It is clear from the above quotation that in cases where there is no provision in any special law making Cr.P.C. applicable the said Code does not apply. In section 36 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance the whole of Cr.P.C. has (not) been made applicable but only the procedure for summary trial contained in section 262, Cr.P.C. has been adopted. The other thing is that even this is not correct that the respondents are public servants. The definition of public servant given in section 21 of the P.P.C. reads as under:‑

21. The words `public servant' denote a person falling any of the descriptions hereinafter following namely:‑ First: Every Covenanted servant of the (State); Second: Every Commissioned Officer in the Military (Naval or Air) Forces of Pakistan while serving under (the Central Government car any Provincial Government); Third: Ever Judge; Fourth: Every officer of a Court of Justice whose duty it is as such officer to investigate or report on any matter of law or fact, or to make, authenticate or keep any document or to take charge or dispose of any property or to execute any judicial process, or to administer any oath or to interpret or to preserve order in the Court; and every person specially authorised by a Court of justice to perform any of such duties; Fifth: Every juryman, assessor or member of a panchayat assisting a Court of justice or public servant; Sixth: Every arbitrator or other person to whom any cause or matter has been referred for decision or report by any Court of justice or by any other competent public authority; Seventh: Every person who holds any office by virtue of which he is empowered to place or keep any person in confinement; Eighth: Every officer of the Government whose duty it is as such officer, to prevent offences, to give information of offences, to bring offenders to justice or to protect the public health, safety or convenience; Ninth: Every officer whose duty it is as such officer, to take, receive, keep or expend any property on behalf of the Government or to make any survey, assessment or contract on behalf of the Government or to execute any revenue process, or to investigate or to report on any matter affecting the pecuniary interests of the Government or to make. authenticate or keep any document relating to the pecuniary interests of the Government or to prevent the infraction of any law for the protection of the pecuniary interests of the Government and every officer in the service or pay of the Government or remunerated by fees or commission for the performance of any public duty; Tenth: Every officer whose duty it is as such officer, to take, receive, keep or expend any property, to make any survey or assessment or to levy any rate or tax for any secular common purpose of any village, town or district or to make, authenticate or keep any document for the ascertaining of the rights of the people of any village, town or district; Eleventh: Every person who holds any office in virtue of which he is empowered to prepare, publish, maintain or revise an electoral roll or to conduct an election or part of an elections. Clauses No. 1 to 8 and 10 to 11 are not applicable and so far as clause No. 9 is concerned there is no evidence that the duties of the respondents are those as contained in the provision. This was a question of fact and unless there is evidence it cannot be said whether the respondents discharge the duties contained in the provision and thus the learned lower Court has wrongly found that they are public servants. The provisions given in section 25‑A(8) are in the nature of contempt of Court and in such cases even otherwise R is not necessary to get C permission for prosecution. In such cases a person has only to inform the Court that contempt of Court has been committed and it cannot be said that he has set the criminal law in motion. However, so far as the complaint brought under section 47/60 is concerned, taking of permission may be necessary if the persons against whom the complaint is brought are covered by the definition of `public servant' and if Cr.P.C. applies to the case. Since I have observed that Cr.P.C. is not applicable even in the complaint brought under section 47/60 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, taking of permission was not necessary and the order of icarncd lower Court is wrong

4. As a result the revisions are accepted and setting aside the impugned order the learned lower Court is directed to proceed with the cases, if it has otherwise jurisdiction. A.E./645/Lb. P Petitions accepted.