| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 2323 2021 SLD 2323 2021 PTD 1617 |
Sindh High Court
Special Criminal Appeals Nos.01, 02, 04, 06 and 07 of 2019, decided on 6th May, 2021, Date of hearing:7th December, 2020.
NAZAR AKBAR, JUSTICE
Umar Farooq for Appellants (in Special Criminal Appeals Nos. 1, 4 and 6 of 2019). Shoukat Ali Shahroze for Appellant (in Special Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2019). Muhammad Jamil for Appellant (in Special Criminal Appeal No.07 of 2019). Ashiq Ali Anwar R
Special Criminal Appeals Nos.01, 02, 04, 06 and 07 of 2019, decided on 6th May, 2021, Date of hearing:7th December, 2020.
NAZAR AKBAR, JUSTICE
Umar Farooq for Appellants (in Special Criminal Appeals Nos. 1, 4 and 6 of 2019). Shoukat Ali Shahroze for Appellant (in Special Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2019). Muhammad Jamil for Appellant (in Special Criminal Appeal No.07 of 2019). Ashiq Ali Anwar R
ASIM KHAN AND OTHERS
VS
THE STATE THROUGH COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, MODEL CUSTOMS COLLECTORATE OF EXPORTS
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 32,32A,156(1)(14),156(1)(14A)
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 382B
(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--Ss.32, 32-A, 156(1)(14) 156(1)(14-A)-Mis-declaration-Scope- Allegation against accused persons was that they filed a fake Form-E, which resulted in loss of foreign exchange-First Information Report was lodged with a delay of more than five months-Complainant had admitted in his cross-examination that he could not say that “Form-E” was sent for verification after five months of the shipment of the goods and that he had never dispatched the “Form-E” in his entire service- Complainant had claimed in his examination-in-chief that the “Form- E” was sent to the issuing Bank for verification of genuineness and had claimed that he had received the reply from the Bank that “Form-E” was not issued by the branch but had not produced any witness from the Bank o verify the alleged correspondence- Complainant had not verified the “Form-E”-Investigating Officer had admitted in his cross-examination that he had not exhibited any document of the State Bank of Pakistan which showed that the “Form- E” was fake-Prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused, in circumstances-Appeals against conviction were allowed, m circumstances. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--S.154-Information in cognizable cases-Delayed F1P-Scope- Delay in lodging FIR is always fatal. JUDGMENT NAZAR AKBAR, JUSTICE:---.--- Through this common judgment I intend to dispose of all the above Spl. Crl. Appeals which have been preferred by the appellants against their conviction through a common judgment dated 23.08.2019 delivered by learned Special Judge (Customs and Taxation), Karachi in case No. 193/2018 arising out of FIR No.SI/Misc/307/2018 Export/EW under Section 156(1)( 14)( 14-A) of the Customs Act, 1969 registered by Model Customs Collectorate of Exports, Customs House, Karachi, whereby the appellant/accused Asmatullah was convicted and sentenced to R.I for a period of five years and fine of Rs.5,00,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine he is to suffer one year S.I. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C was also extended to him, whereas, all the other accused being abettors, facilitated and connived in the subject offence were convicted and sentenced…
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