| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 1804 2017 SLD 1804 2017 SCMR 669 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos. 153 and 154 of 2012, decision & hearing Date : 15-02-2017 (Against the judgment Dated 26.02.2010 of the Accountability Court-II, Quetta passed in Criminal Ehtesab Appeals Nos. 4 and 5 of 2010)
DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, JUSTICE, QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE, MAQBOOL BAQAR, JUSTICE
Nemo for Appellant (in Crl. A. No. 153 of 2012). Haji Shakil Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant (in Crl. A. No. 154 of 2012). Syed Ali Imran, Spl. Prosecutor, NAB for the State (in both cases).
Criminal Appeals Nos. 153 and 154 of 2012, decision & hearing Date : 15-02-2017 (Against the judgment Dated 26.02.2010 of the Accountability Court-II, Quetta passed in Criminal Ehtesab Appeals Nos. 4 and 5 of 2010)
DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, JUSTICE, QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE, MAQBOOL BAQAR, JUSTICE
Nemo for Appellant (in Crl. A. No. 153 of 2012). Haji Shakil Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant (in Crl. A. No. 154 of 2012). Syed Ali Imran, Spl. Prosecutor, NAB for the State (in both cases).
SOHRAB KHAN MARRI KHUDA BAKHSH
VS
THE STATE
Law: National Accountability Ordinance, 1999
Section: 9(a)(iii)(iv)
National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999)--- ----S. 9(a)(iii) & (iv)---Misappropriation of public money---Reappraisal of evidence---Accused was the Collecting Officer of the Market Committee and collected money in the shape of market committee fee on agricultural produce---Accused was alleged to have misappropriated an amount of Rs. 4.2 million with the collaboration and in connivance with his supervising officer/co-accused---Accountability Court sentenced both the accused and co-accused to 5 years' imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2.1 million each---Validity---Both the Trial Court and the Appellate Court had recorded concurrent findings about the guilt of the accused and co-accused in a conclusive manner based on fair and proper appraisal of evidence---Besides at time of granting leave to appeal to the accused and co-accused by the Supreme Court, their conviction was not challenged but request was made to grant leave to consider the reduction of their sentences---Accused and co-accused had openly misappropriated public money having little regard for the law and the trust reposed in them---Supreme Court maintained the sentence and fine awarded to accused and co-accused by Accountability Court and observed that courts had to apply strict standards and show zero tolerance for corruption and people involved in such type of crimes, and those whose guilt was well established should get the maximum sentence and no mercy should be shown to them---Appeal was dismissed accordingly. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, JUSTICE:---.--- This single judgment shall also decide Criminal Appeal No. 154/2012 because both have arisen out of the same judgment in the same case and because in both we have to consider the appropriate quantum of sentence to be awarded because of the leave granting order. 2. The brief but relevant facts of the case are that Khuda Bakhsh was the Collecting Officer of the Market Committee of collecting fee on agricultural produce in the relevant period while Sohrab Khan Massi was supervisory officer and under the law, he was responsible for all the official acts of the other appellant namely, Khuda Bakhsh. 3. During the relevant period,…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492