Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 1383 2022 SLD 1383 2022 PCRLJ 1032
Sindh High Court
Criminal Accountability Appeals Nos. 51 and 52 of 2018,decision dated: 27th August, 2021.
MUHAMMAD IQBAL KALHORO AND SHAMSUDDIN ABBASI, JJ
Ali Asghar Buriro and Jamil Ahmed Rajpar for Appellants (in Criminal Accountability Appeals Nos. 51 and 52 of 2018). R.D. Kalhoro, Special Prosecutor NAB for
Respondent (in Criminal Accountability Appeals Nos. 51 and 52 of 2018).

ASADULLAH SOLANGI and anotherVSThe STATE (NAB) through Director General

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 342

Law: National Accountability Ordinance, 1999

Section: 9(a)(vi)

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 342---Statement of accused---Defence plea---Reliance---If accused person has a defence plea the same should be put to witnesses in cross-examination and then put forward the same while recording statement under S. 342, Cr.P.C.---Where no specific plea is taken by accused person in his statement under S. 342, Cr.P.C., such statement has to be discarded for not confidence inspiring. (b) National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999)--- ----S. 9(a)(vi)---Misuse of authority, attempt of---Appreciation of evidence---Personal gain---Causing of financial loss---Principle---Accused persons were officials of revenue department who were convicted for misusing their authority and sentenced to imprisonment for ten years---Plea raised by accused persons was that they had not drawn any personal gain nor caused any financial loss to national exchequer---Validity---Accused persons in their official capacity failed to discharge their duties in accordance with minimum required standards to protect assets of government which was a sacred trust under their command and control---Accused persons failed to do so and it amounted to corruption and corrupt practices---Offence of corruption and corrupt practices as provided in S. 9(a)(vi) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, included even an attempt to misuse authority so as to gain any benefit to any other persons and it need not necessarily resulted in any personal gain to accused---Prosecution successfully proved its case against accused persons beyond shadow of doubt---Accused persons failed to point out any material illegality or serious infirmity committed by Trial Court while passing in question---High Court declined to interfere in conviction and sentence awarded to accused persons as the same was based on fair evaluation of evidence brought on record---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. Mansur-ul-Haque v. Government of Pakistan PLD 2008 SC 166; The State and others v. M. Idrees Ghauri and others 2008 SCMR 1118; Pir MazharulHaq and others v. The State through Chief Ehtesab Commissioner, Islamabad PLD 2005 SC 63; M. Anwar Saifullah Khan v. The State PLD 2002 Lah.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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