The central legal point established in the judgment is that a conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code involves moral turpitude, leading to disqualification from holding office under Rule 453 (1) (d) of the U. P. Cooperative societies Rules, 1968.

( 1 ) THE petitioner seeks to quash the order dated 14. 11. 2002 passed by the Registrar, Co-operative societies, U. P. , Lucknow, respondent No. 2, holding that the petitioner is not entitled to continue on the post of Chairman of District Cooperative Bank, Gorakhpur (in short the bank) on the ground that he was involved in an offence involving moral turpitude.

( 2 ) THE brief facts are that the petitioner was elected as Chairman of the District Co-operative bank, Gorakhpur in the year 1999. He was convicted in Sessions Trial No. 225 of 1995 and the sessions Judge convicted him under Section 302 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code and awarded him sentence of life imprisonment on 7th July, 2000. The petitioner preferred Criminal appeal No. 609 of 2000, against the said order. In the appeal, this Court has granted him bail and the execution of sentence has been suspended.

( 3 ) RESPONDENT No. 5 was also one of the Directors of the Bank, it is alleged that he submitted resignation from his post and it was accepted by the Committee of Management on 29. 5. 2002. Respondent No. 5 filed writ petition against the decision of the Committee of Management of the bank accepting his resignation. In the said writ petition, the Court passed an order restraining the petitioner from functioning as Chairman of the Bank. The petitioner preferred special leave petition against the order of this Court in the Supreme Court. The Honble Supreme Court disposed of the matter with the direction that the Registrar Co-operative Societies shall decide the two questions as to whether the petitioner is entitled to function after his conviction under section 302 by the Sessions Court and secondly, as to whether respondent No. 5 had in fact submitted resignation and its effect. The Registrar, respondent No. 2, after hearing both the parties passed the impugned order dated 15. 11. 2002, holding that the petitioner is not entitled to continue in the office as Chairman of the Bank under Rule 453 (1) (d) of the U. P. Cooperative societies Rules, 1968 (in short the Rules) as he has been convicted in an offence involving moral turpitude and the necessary action can be taken in this regard under Rule 454 of the Rules. It was further held that respondent No. 5 had submitted resignation and there is no infirmity in the decision of the Committee of Management accepting his resignation.

( 4 ) THE core question in this writ petition is as to whether the petitioner is disqualified from continuing as member of Committee of Management under Rule 453 (1) (d) of the Rules which provides that if a person has been convicted in an offence involving, in the opinion of the registrar, moral turpitude he is not eligible to continue as member of Committee of management. The Rule reads as under :

"453 (1) No person shall be eligible to be or to continue as a member of the Committee of management of a Co-operative Society, if : (d) he has been convicted in an offence involving, in the opinion of the Registrar, moral turpitude, such conviction not having been set aside in appeal. "

( 5 ) THE prosecution case against the petitioner and other accused persons in the Sessions Trial was that a written report was lodged by the informant Satyabrat Tiwari on 20. 3. 1992 at 6. 55 a. m. at police station Gola, district Gorakhpur, with the allegations that on 20. 3. 1992 at 6. 30 a. m. he along with his brother Prafful Tiwari, one Bindeshwari Tiwari, Brij Nath Tiwari and chakradhari Yadav was going to Gorakhpur from his cinema hall, situate in town Gola, in his own jeep and when his jeep reached near the turning of the road for Guest House in town Gola, one Bansidhar Dubey stopped the jeep and requested Prafful TJwari who was driving the jeep to take him also in the jeep in case it was going to Gorakhpur. Prafful Tiwari told him that he may come at the residence of Ram Shakal Yadav as he was intending to drink water there and thereafter he shall take him in his jeep, Prafful Ti