2011 CRI. L. J. 117 ::2010 (6) AIR Bom R 75 ::2011 (3) Bom CR(Cri) 216 ::(2010) 4 Mh LJ (Cri) 203 ::2011 (1) Mah LJ 371 ::2010 All MR(CRI) 2993

Bombay High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): B. H. Marlapalle, Anoop V. Mohta , JJ

Prevention of Corruption Act (2 of 1947) , S.2(c)— Maharashtra Law Officers (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Remuneration) Rules (1984) , R.33— Public Prosecutor/Additional Public Prosecutor - Whether a public servant - Appointments of Public Prosecutor/Additional Public Prosecutor were made under Rules of (1984) for fixed tenure and were contractual in nature - There was no employer-employee relationship between State Government and such appointees - However, they perform public duties and receive their fees as prescribed under Rules - They were not allowed to appear against State Government or its officers unless specific permission in writing was obtained - Public Prosecutor (Additional Public Prosecutor) is therefore a public servant u/S.2(c) of Act. 2008 Cri LJ (NOC) 292 (Bom); 2010 All MR (Cri) 401, Overruled. In present case the question to be decided is whether Public Prosecutor/Additional Public Prosecutor can be said to be a Public Servant within the meaning of the said term as defined in Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appointments of the Assistant Government Pleader or the Additional Public Prosecutor are made under the Maharashtra Law Officers Rules and though they are contractual in nature, there is undoubtedly no employer-employee relationship between the State Government and such appointees. H....