| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1957 SLG 53 1957 SLD 53 1957 PLD 461 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 114 of 1956, decided on 11th April 1957, from the order of Qadir Bakhsh, Special Judge, Lahore, dated the 17th January 1956. dates of hearing : 22nd January 1957, 13th and 14th March 1957
SHABIR AHMAD, J
M. B. Zaman for Appellant. Mushtaq Hussain for A. G. for
Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 114 of 1956, decided on 11th April 1957, from the order of Qadir Bakhsh, Special Judge, Lahore, dated the 17th January 1956. dates of hearing : 22nd January 1957, 13th and 14th March 1957
SHABIR AHMAD, J
M. B. Zaman for Appellant. Mushtaq Hussain for A. G. for
Respondent
TUFAIL HUSSAIN SHAH
VS
THE STATE
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 234,233,239
Law: Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947
Section: 5(1)(c)
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)------ ----S. 234-Seven acts of unauthorised sale of Government wood entrusted to accused -Held to be seven distinct offences in absence of proof that they were result of a single act of misappropriation-Prevention of Corruption Act (11 of 1947), S. 5 (1) (c). Seven acts of unauthorised sale of Government wood entrusted to the accused were subjects of a charge under section 5 (1) (c), Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947): Held, that in the absence of any evidence that the seven sales were the result of a single act of misappropriation, each of the sales was a distinct offence and because of the provisions of section 234 Criminal P. C., could not be tried together. Ghulam Muhammad v. Crown P L D 1952 Lah. 11 distinguished. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)----- ----Ss. 233 239 -Seven acts of misappropriation charged jointly against two accused, along with one additional act against one only of the accused without any evidence of conspiracy, abetment or sameness of transaction-Misjoinder of persons-Trial vitiated. Held, that the joint trial of offences arising out of seven unauthorised sales of Government property against the two accused, along with an additional offence of converting Government property to his own use alleged against one only of the accused, which was not stated to have been committed in the course of the same transaction as the other offences, would have been permissible if the accusation were that the offence committed by the latter accused alone had resulted from a conspiracy between the two or had been abetted by the other accused. As there was no evidence of conspiracy or abetment, the case was one of misjoinder of persons and the trial was vitiated. Whether or not a re-trial should take place was left for the Provincial Government to decide. Noor Din v. Crown P L D 1952 Lah. 185 ref. JUDGMENT SHABIR AHMAD, J.-----The joint trial of Abdur Rahman, Overseer, Punjab P. W. D., Buildings and Roads Branch, and Tufail Husain, Road Inspector of that Department, resulted in the conviction of both under section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, for which offence each was sentenced to…
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