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 Appeal No. 171 of 1982, decided on 13th November, 1984.
‑‑‑S. 161‑‑Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)‑‑Illegality in trial‑‑Trial Court not caring to exhibit case property despite statement of witness that it was not present in Court‑‑Tainted currency notes not shown to witnesses at time of their examination and same were not put to accused when examined under S.342, Cr.P.C.‑‑Conviction and sentence set aside and case sent back to trial Court for de novo trial.
Malik Muhammad Sadiq for Appellant.
Zafar Yasin for the State.
Date of hearing: 13th November, 1984.
This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of the learned. Senior Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption, Punjab, Lahore, whereby he on 4‑4‑1982 convicted Mushtaq Hussain appellant under section 161, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentenced him to .one and half years' R.I.
2. Since after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I feel inclined to set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant on account of illegality in the trial, I need not enter into the merits of the case. I find that the trial Judge who was expected not to sit as a statue did not care to exhibit case property and despite the statement of the Civil Judge that the case property was not present in the Court, he proceeded to record his evidence. In the circumstances of the case, he should have adjourned the case and then recorded the evidence when the case property was available in the Court. Since the tainted currency was not shown to the witnesses at the time of their examination and the same was not put to the accused‑appellant at the time when examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., therefore, is no option A but to set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant and send back the case to the trial Court for de novo trial. The appellant who has been brought under custody today shall immediately be released, if not required in any case. He shall remain on the bail bonds already executed by him.
M.A. K. Appeal accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer