Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous 320/Q to 325/Q of 1980, decided on 5th February, 1986.

‑‑----S. 561‑A ‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860). Ss. 409, 420 & 468‑‑Preventior of Corruption ,Act (11 of 1947), S.5(2)‑‑Quashing of proceedings Embezzlement taking place in 1969 due to irregularities of certain officers and first information report in shape of ,written complaint registered in 1975 from which it was not clear when name of accused was added‑‑Challan against officers including accused sent up to Special Judge Anti‑Corruption in 1977 and no evidence recorded upto stage when petition for quashing proceedings filed by accused which was admitted on ground of delay‑‑After lapse of five years as such, no useful purpose, held, would be served to proceed against accused‑‑Proceedings quashed.

Shahid Husain Kadri for Petitioner.

Akhtar Shabbir, A.A.‑G. for the State.

Date of hearing: 5th February, 1986.

These petitions (Cr.M.No.320/Q‑80, 321/Q‑80, 322/Q‑80, 323/Q‑80, 324/Q‑80 and 325/Q‑80) are connected and have been filed by the same petitioner under section 561‑A, Cr.P.C. for quashment of proceedings pending against him in the Court of Special Judge Anti‑Corruption, Lahore under section 409/420/468, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 in six separate cases: The proceedings were initiated against him on the basis of a written complaint on 25‑4‑1975. The allegation against him was that while he was an employee of the Technology and Processing Section in the Animal Husbandry College certain embezzlement and misappropriation took place due to irregularities committed by fourteen officers of the Institution among those one was the petitioner although his name was not mentioned in the F.I.R. but subsequently was added thereto. These connected petitions were admitted in June, 1980, and one of the grounds taken was that until then no evidence had been recorded despite the fact that the case was registered against the petitioner etc. five years prior to the filing of the petition under section 561‑A. Cr.P.C. The second ground taken was that the present petitioner was not named in the F.I.R. initially but was subsequently added on account of the departmental animosity.

2. I have examined the record. It indicates that after the filing of the present petitions under section 561‑A, Cr.P.C. the Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption, Lahore started recording evidence in July, 1980 and evidence of six witnesses was recorded between 1‑7‑1980 and 3‑7‑1980. Thereafter the record was requisitioned and transferred to this Court It may further be noted that the misappropriation or the embezzlement due to committal of irregularities apparently took place in 1969. So what appears to be is this Embezzlement etc. took place due to committal of irregularities by certain officers in 1969, F.I.R. was registered in the form of a written complaint in 1975, it is not clear when the name of the present petitioner was added as one of the accused, the challan against the officers including the present petitioner wag sent up before the Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption in 1977 and no evidence was recorded until June, 1980 when the present petitions under sec4ion 561‑A, Cr.P.C. were filed. Thus, eventually these petitions were admitted on the ground of inordinate delay. Now five more years have passed and in my view no useful purpose will be served to proceed against the petitioner at this belated stage. In that view of the matter the proceedings pending against the petitioner under the aforesaid sections in six different cases in the Court of Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption, Lahore are hereby quashed. This petition is disposed of.

M. Y. H. Proceeding quashed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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