Law: Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947)

Section: 5(2)

Law: Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947

Section: 5(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 409 read with Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)-Criminal, misappropriation Government servant-Substantial portion of public money received by public servant while still in service-Prosecution of such person under S. 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, held, not barred after his removal from public service. Date of hearing. : 27th January 1971.       JUDGMENT This is an appeal against he judgment of the learned Special Judge (Central), Karachi, convicting the appellant for an offence under section 409, P. P. C./5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947) and sentencing him to undergo R. I' for I year and pay a fine of Rs. 10,000 or in default to undergo R. I. for one year, ordering further that the amount of Rs. 7,096 out of the fine if recovered be paid to the Post and Telegraph Department. The appellant was appointed Government auctioner of Telephone District Karachi on 4-6-59 and commissioned to function up to 30th December 1959. In his official capacity he gave public notice of an auction in `fang' daily dated 21-11-59 for auction to tie field on 10-12-59. The auction proceedings were supervised by Mr. Hashmi. The bids of Ismail and Kamil were accepted for Rs. 3,500 and, Rs. 3,596 respectively. According to the rules the ruction-purchasers were required to deposit 25% of the price with the auctioner (appellant) for payment to the department on the following day of the auction and the balance was to be paid within one week. It is said that the bidders had paid the entire amount to the appellant but he failed to deposit it to the department. A telegram. was therefore sent to him on 14th December 1959 and this was followed by letter dated 11-1-60. At last on 23-6-60 the appellant gave a cheque for Rs. 3,000 to Mr. Hashmi and obtained the delivery of one lot sold to Kamil. The delivery was taken by one Siraj Uddin. However Mr. Hashmi insisted that the appellant should give him two cheques for each lot and furnish details of the auction. On 29th January 1960 the appellant delivered, two cheques for Rs. 3,520-13-0 and Rs. 3,480-5-0 after deducting the amount due to him. He also…