| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 2958 2007 SLD 2958 2007 PLD 536 |
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 193 of 2006, decided on 10th August, 2007, DATE of hearing: 29th May, 2007
MUHAMMAD AFZAL SOOMRO AND RAHMAT HUSSAIN, JAFFERI, JJ
Muhammad Ashraff Kazi for Appellant. Ain-ud-Din Khan, ADPGA for
Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 193 of 2006, decided on 10th August, 2007, DATE of hearing: 29th May, 2007
MUHAMMAD AFZAL SOOMRO AND RAHMAT HUSSAIN, JAFFERI, JJ
Muhammad Ashraff Kazi for Appellant. Ain-ud-Din Khan, ADPGA for
Respondent.
ZULFIQAR ALI SHAR
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 409 & 477-A---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Charge against accused being that of criminal breach of trust, prosecution must prove not only entrustment of or dominion over property, but also that accused either, dishonestly misappropriated, converted, used or disposed of that property himself or that he wilfully helped some other person to do so---Prosecution must affirmatively prove those ingredients of the offence unless the receipt of the money was admitted by accused and he offered no satisfactory explanation of what he did with it---In the present case, accused, in his statement recorded under S.342, Cr.P.C., had categorically denied the receipt of amount in dispute---Prosecution had failed to prove the ingredients of offence under provisions of S.409, P.P.C.---Accused had further been convicted for offence punishable under S.477-A, P.P.C..---No evidence had been led by the prosecution to prove that accused, with intent to defraud, had made or abetted the making of any false entries in the books of accounts, except the statement of Handwriting Expert which had simply shown that writing on some documents was similar to that of the accused---Examination of said documents and specimen writing of the accused showed vast difference between both the writings---Handwriting Expert was also not definite with the disputed writing as he had opined that writings were similar but did not use the word "same"---Prosecution, in circumstances had failed to prove the case against accused beyond any reasonable doubt---Conviction and sentence awarded to accused under impugned were set aside giving him benefit of doubt---Accused was acquitted and set at liberty. Shakir Hussain v. The State PLD 1956 SC (Pak.) 417 and Kishin Singh v. Emperor AIR 1928 PC 254 ref. JUDGMENT RAHMAT HUSSAIN JAFFERI, J.---The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 27-3-2006 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Special Court (Offences in Banks), Sindh at Karachi, by which the learned Judge convicted the appellant for offence punishable under section 409, P.P.C., sentenced him to suffer R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs.13.54…
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