The term "trade" in the Twelfth clause of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code should be interpreted in a broad sense to include any service for remuneration, including air transport service.

( 1 ) THE question that falls for determination by the Full Bench is, whether an employee of the Indian Airlines Corporation, which is a corporation established under the Air Corporations Act, 1953, is a "public servant" within the meaning of the Twelfth clause of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. That clause and Explanation 4 were added by the Criminal Law Amendment Act (II of 1958 ). The purpose of the amendment was to bring within the purview of the anti-corruption law, as enacted in the Indian Penal Code and in the Prevention of Corruption Act, the employees of statutory trading corporations and Government companies, which manage a great deal of public money and public property as a necessary consequence of the rapid expansion of Governmental activities in a Welfare State. In the amended form, Section 21, so far as is material, reads thus: "section 21:-- Public Servant: The words "public servant" denote a person falling under any of the descriptions hereinafter following namely, -. . . . . Twelfth:-- Every officer in the service or pay of a local authority or of a corporation engaged in any trade or industry which is established by a Central, Provincial or State Act or of a Government Company as defined in Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. . . . . . Explanation 4: The expression "corporation engaged in any trade or industry" includes a banking, insurance or financial corporation, a river valley corporation and corporation for supplying power, light or water to the public. "

( 2 ) THE question we have to decide is common to all these revision petitions, which have been preferred by one H. V. Jagadesh against the orders passed by the Special Judge for S. P. E. Cases, Secunderabad, overruling the preliminary objections raised by the petitioner touching the jurisdiction of the court to try him for offences under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

( 3 ) THE facts material for deciding the question are as follows: The petitioner is an employee of the Indian Airlines Corporation, Begumpet, and was serving from 27-1-1948 to 12-9-1959, on which date he was put under suspension. He was originally designated as Purchase Assistant, but from 6-9-1956 his designation appears to have been changed to that of Supplies Assistant. He, however, continued to be familiarly known as Purchase Assistant. In that capacity he is alleged to have committed several acts of misappropriation with respect to the property and funds belonging to the Indian Airlines Corporation. After due investigation, four separate charge-sheets were filed against him by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Special Police Establishment, Hyderabad, and the cases were taken on file by the Special Judge for S. P. E. Cases, Hyderabad at Secunderabad, as C. C. Nos. 2 to 5 of 1963. The offences alleged against the petitioner in the charge sheets were inter alia offences punishable under Section 5 (2) read with 5 (1) (c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. These offences were alleged against the petitioner on footing that he is "public Servant" as defined in Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. Likewise the Special Judge framed charges against the petitioner in all the four cases under Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code on the assumption that the petitioner is a "public servant".

( 4 ) AFTER the charges were so framed, the petitioner raised two preliminary objections before the Special Judge; first, that he is not a "public servant" within the meaning of the Twelfth clause of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code, inasmuch as the Indian Airlines Corporation of which he is an employee, is not engaged in any trade or industry as contemplated by the Twelfth clause: and secondly, that the sanction necessary for the prosecution of the petitioner for an offence under Section 5 (2) of the Preven