Find a Lawyer

Criminal Appeal No. 553 of 1966, decided on 5th November 1968.

Mens rea‑To be attributed to accused (except in cases of nature of traffic; offences) before conviction curt be made.

S. 419/109‑‑Abetment far cheating by impersonation‑Accused neither shown to have abetted commission of offence with guilty knowledge nor found to have made any illegal gain in transaction‑Conviction, held, cannot be maintained‑Accused acquitted.

Abu Hossain Sarkar for Appellant.

Nurul Huq Bhuiyan for the State.

This appeal is by one Basiruddin Ahmed who is Chairman of the Local Council. He has been convicted under section 419/109 of the Pakistan Penal Code and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100 in default to rigorous imprisonment for one month. He has also been convicted under section 420/109 of the Penal Code and sentence to imprisonment till rising of the Court and a fine of Rs. 100.00 in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month.

The case of the prosecution is that the accused appellant. identified one Mazibar Rahman when he withdrew a sum of Ks. 77.50 paisa as compensation money under the State Acquisition Act. The acquittance roll shows the name of Mazibar Rahman, but the father's name was different. It is also in the evidence that accused knew the boy Mazibar Rahman as a school student. It is also in the evidence that he identified many persons on that date. It is clearly found by the Special Judge who convicted the present accused that "Basiruddin Ahmed did not gain any thing for what he did in the matter of siding accused Mazibar Rahman by his illegal omission and non‑interference. "In every criminal case before a conviction can be made some mens red is to be attributed to the accused except in cases of the nature of traffic offences. In this case the accused has been convicted of A aiding a person for cheating by impersonation and also aiding him in cheating. This is certainly a heinous offence but it has not ,seen shown by the prosecution that the accused had done whatever he did or omitted to do with guilty knowledge. On the face of the prosecution case that he was the local Chairman and that Mazibar Rahman was known to him as a school student and also in the face of the clear finding of the Special Judge that the accused appellant had made no illegal gain in the transaction, I find it difficult to attribute any mens red to the accused and I hold that whatever the accused appellant did was bona fide. He bona fide believed that the recipient of the compensation money was Mazibar Rahman whom he identified. In these circumstances T hold that the conviction cannot be maintained.

I allow the appeal and acquit the accused‑appellant of both the charges. The fine, if paid, is to be refunded.

Appeal allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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