Section 497 (2) of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 380 and 409 of the Corruption Act (II of 1947), Section 5 (2) Theft at residence, Crimes by public servant, Corruption, further investigation The transfer of prize bonds to property / boxes in the form of joint assignments between KG Grant State Bank officials, railway officials and police personnel, was in three hands and nowhere did the prosecutor think that the boogie / Vehicles were locked. Whether the train was opened, opened or broken by the aforementioned boogie, or in any other form of fellowship, took the entire journey of the train, in the joint assignment of property in question, equal responsibility would fall on the shoulders of all persons. ? The safe delivery of the boxes exceeded the number of boxes of prize bonds, replaced by LL ten and replaced by a KK nine box, with a box missing, which sank into mystery and uncertainty. Nothing was recovered from the police guards, nor did they find any benefit to the property, yet no evidence was available for the railway authorities and the evidence of the role of the State Bank authorities at the site. Who had given it to him. Further investigation into the missing box containing the prize bonds was allegedly canceled by the State Bank, although the checker received no damage, but the provisions were nonetheless. 409 and 380, PPC, and under section 5 (2) of the Prevention, the offense is present. The Corruption Act, 1947, when confronted with suspicion, is not a maximum punishment for punishing criminals.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
