Find a Lawyer

Criminal Appeal No. 399 of 1979, decided on 6th May, 1984.

-- S. 5(2) - Accused a Government servant illegally obtaining electricity connection for his residence--Charge accepted at its face value, held, did not tantamount to criminal misconduct punishable under S. 5, cis. (a) to (d)--Conviction of accused under S. 5(2), held, not maintainable.

Ch. Muhammad Tujail Basra for Appellant.

Ch. Muhammad Ibrahim for the State.

Date of hearing: 6th May, 1984.

This criminal appeal arises from judgment of learned Special Judge Anti-Corruption, Punjab, Lahore whereby be, on 16th February, 197 convicted Ghulam Sarwar appellant under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentenced him to imprisonment till rising of the Court and a fine of Rs. 1,500, in default thereof to further R. for one year.

2. The charge against the appellant is that while posted as in Drainage Division, he illegally obtained electricity connection residential quarter from the Guard Room of the Divisional Office used electricity from January, 1970 to July, 1973 without paying charges to the department and thereby wrongful loss of Rs. 1,278.29 to the Government and corresponding pecuniary gain for himself. The appellant denied the charge and claimed to be tried. On the conclusion of the trial, the appellant was convicted under section 5(2) of the Prevention o1 Corruption Act, 1947.

3. Since I am inclined to accept the appeal on a short legal ground, therefore I need not set out the f act, in detail and need not discuss the evidence of the parties. The legal ground is that the charge accepted at its face value does not tantamount to misconduct punishable under section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. Section 5 of the Act relating tot criminal misconduct may be reproduced advantageously.

"5. Criminal misconduct.-(1) A public servant is said to commit the offence of criminal misconduct-

(a) if he accepts or obtains or agrees to accept or obtain from any person for himself or for any other person, gratification (other than legal remuneration) as a reward such as is mentioned in section 161 of the Penal Code, or

(b) if he accepts or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain himself or for any other person, any valuable thing without consideration or for a consideration which he knows to be inadequate, from any person whom he knows to have been, or to be, or to be likely to be concerned in any proceeding or business transacted by him, or, having any connection with the official functions of himself or of any public servant to whom he is subordinate, or from any person whom he knows to be interested in or related to the person so concerned, or

(c) if he dishonestly or fraudulently mis appropriates or otherwise converts for his own use any property entrusted to him or under his control as a public servant or allows any person to do so, or

(d) if he, by corrupt or illegal means, or by otherwise abusing his position as public servant, obtains for himself or for any other person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage."

The plain reading of section 5 indicates that the act of the appellant that he illegally obtained electricity connection for his residence from Guard Room of the Divisional Office and the use of electricity by him does not fall within the purview of clauses (A to D) of section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

4. For what has been stated above, I am of the view that the conviction of the appellant under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 is not maintainable. The appeal is accepted an /d the appellant is acquitted of the charge. He is on bail. His bail bonds/ stand discharged.

M. Y. H. Appeal accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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