Law: National Accountability Ordinance, 1999

Section: 9(a)(iii)(iv), 10 & 14

National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 (XVIII of 1999)--

----Ss. 9(a)(iii)(iv), 10 & 14--Prevention of Corruption Act, (II of 1947), Ss. 5(2)--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), Ss.409, 420, 468 & 471--The appellants were tried, under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 held guilty u/S. 9(a)(iii)(iv) and punished u/S. 10 of Ordinance and in view of Section 14 of Ordinance, there is presumption that if an accused does not prove to contrary, it shall be presumed that he is involved in corruption and corrupt practices within meaning of Section 9 of said Ordinance--However, perusal of Section 14 of Ordinance would reveal that at trial first it is to be proved by prosecution and then it shall be presumed that accused is involved in corruption or corrupt practices if he does not prove to contrary--Thus first of all it was obligation of prosecution to prove its case and then accused was presumed to defend-- At cost of repetition without fear of contradiction, it may be mentioned that prosecution has failed to prove at trial that appellants committed fraud or misappropriated any amount or were involved in corruption or corrupt practices within meaning of Section 9 punishable u/S. 10 of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999--The prosecution is not proved and is replete with doubts--Even a single doubt is sufficient to create dent in prosecution case--The net result is that prosecution has failed to prove its case against appellants beyond reasonable doubts and Court hold accordingly--Appeal accepted. [Para 16, 17 & 18] A, B & C

2011 SCMR 136 and 2009 SCMR 790.