Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Petition‑for Leave to Appeal No. 164 of 1983, decided on 10th May, 1983.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, dated 26‑3‑1983 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 34/1974 of Bahawalpur)
‑‑ Art. 185 (3)‑Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(c) Charge against accused that accused living beyond means and acquired property disproportionate to his legitimate income‑Petitioner having residential house of his own with bank balance which accused could not satisfactorily account for‑Courts below considering all relevant points‑Conviction and sentence passed on accused, held, based on proper appraisal of evidence ‑ Petition being without merits, dismissed.
S. Pir Altaf Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. M. Khan Mahtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for the State.
Date of hearing : 10th May, 1983.
This petition is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption, Bahawalpur dated 2‑3‑1974 whereby the accused/petitioner was sentenced to six months' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 500 in default, to further R. I. for one month under section 5(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The petitioner filed an appeal against his conviction and sentence in the Lahore High Court which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge vide the impugned judgment, dated 26‑3‑1983.
2. The main charge against the accused/petitioner was that he was living beyond his means and acquired property disproportionate to his legitimate income. It was found by the trial Court that the petitioner had a residential house and a balance of Rs. 64,017 in the National Bank of Pakistan which he could not satisfactorily account for. Both the Courts below have taken into consideration all the points relevant to the case. Learned counsel for the accused/petitioner contended that the conviction is not based on unimpeachable evidence; that the sentence passed on the accused/petitioner is based on conjectures and surmises. We have considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel but we find no force in this petition. The conviction and sentence passed on the accused/petitioner is based on proper appraisal of the evidence. The petition is without any merit and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
Leave refused.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer