Find a Lawyer

HAJI RAJA MUBARIK versus DR. ENAYAT HUSSAIN

Sections 420, 468, 471, 409 and 21 of the Corruption Act (II of 1947), Section 5 (2) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act (XL of 1958), Section 6 (5) of the Cooperative Society Act (VII of 1925), Appeal complaint against the Special Judge of Section 65B Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Articles 417 and 197, was dismissed and the respondents / accused were acquitted, observing that the Government had to approve the Special Judge of the prosecution. Cannot proceed in light of the denial while defendants acquit. , Held further; that the defendants were not civil servants and that there was a crime, if any, with which they were charged, they did not qualify for public servants. Since the defendants were not civil servants, no prior permission was required for prosecution. And even the sanction of litigation was denied by any competent authority. And that the case filed by the civil court for recovery of the amount filed by the appellant / complainant cannot be ruled out that the respondents / accused were the officials of Pakistan Medical Cooperative Housing Society at the time. ? According to the Co-operative Society Act, Section 65B of 1925, every officer of the society shall be treated as a Government employee, in which case, the Government Employee and the Special Judge disregard the provisions of Section 65B of the Co-operative Society Act, 1925, and pass the order. used to. Prior to litigation against a civil servant was provided under Section 197, CRPC and Section 6 (5) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958, and it was stated that the provisions of law were earlier Hey jobs for advocates from Bhakkar lawyer