Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

SHAH KHATOON versus THE STATE


The Pakistan Penal Code section 420, fraud, the alleged charge of obtaining a payroll under another name and accepting its pay, cannot be appreciated as such, and as such it cannot be complied with under section 420. Cannot be punished. He was acquitted

1986 P Cr. L J 2323

[Lahore]

Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J

SHAH KHATOON Appellant

Versus

THE STATE Respondent

Criminal Appeal No, 599 of 1985, decided on 8th February,1986.

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

‑‑‑S. 420‑‑Cheating, offence of‑‑Accused allegedly posing and receiving salary under another name‑‑Act of accused, accepting it at its face value, held, would not fall within definition A cheating and as such she could not be convicted under S. 420‑‑Accused was acquitted in circumstances.

Rana Muhammad Nasim Sabir for Appellant.

Rafi Siddiqui for the State.

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal arises from the judgment of learned Senior Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption, Lahore whereby he, on 14‑9‑1985 while acquitting Shah Khatoon appellant of the charge under section 471, P.P.C. convicted her under section 420, P.P.C. and sentenced her to imprisonment till rising of the Court and a fine of Rs.2,000 in default thereof S.I. for 3 months.

2. The charge against the appellant was that she had been posing as Mst. Zafar Maqbul teachers and had received salary from December, 1972 to May, 1977 in the name of Mst. Zafar Maqbul.

3. Since after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I feel in clined to accept the appeal on the ground that the allegations as well as the findings of the trial Court accepted at its face value no offence punishable under section 420, P.P.C. is made out against the appellant. I need not set out the facts in detail and enter into the merits of the case. I find that the trial Court in para. No. 12 of judgment has stated that;

"The evidence of Mst. Irshad Begum and Mst: Kalsoom Akhtar proves beyond any manner of doubt that the accused had been posing as Mst. Zaffar Maqbul and had received salary from December, 1972 to May 1977, in the name of Mst. Zaffar Maqbul."

I am of the view that the findings of the learned trial Court accepted at its face value, the act of the accused does not fall within the definition of cheating under, section 415, P. P. C. and as such she could not have been convicted under section 420, P.P.C.

4. For what has been said above, the appal is accepted and the appellant is acquitted of the charge.

S.A. 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.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
property advocate from Jehangira lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.