PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

TANVEER AHMED MANGRIO vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJN 31 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2022 PCrLJN 31 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2022
Parties
TANVEER AHMED MANGRIO vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 342

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

TANVEER AHMED MANGRIO VS State Ss. 409, 420, 468, 471 & 477-a---Criminal breach of trust by public servant, or by Banker, merchant or agent, cheating or dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery for purpose of cheating, using as genuine a forged document, falsification of accounts---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Sentence, modification of---accused were charged for committing embezzlement of Rs. 82,44,300---admittedly, accused was a cashier of a Bank and the evidence available against him was of a prosecution witness, who deposed that he had deposited amount of Rs. 100,000 in his account but the said deposit slip was given to him by his Munshi---after one month, he had obtained his account statement which revealed that the said amount was not credited in his account---Said slip was signed by the accused---allegedly, said piece of evidence was not confronted to the accused at the time of recording his statement under S. 342, Cr.P.C., to obtain his clarification about his signature---Incriminating evidence available on record must be put to accused in his statement under S. 342, Cr.P.C., otherwise the same could not be used against him---Signatures of accused were available on the deposit slip, but same did not have resemblance with the signatures of accused available on the vakalatnama and other documents---Such piece of evidence did not support the prosecution case to connect the accused in the commission of offence---appeal to the extent of accused was allowed and he was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court---Many deposit slips available on record bore the signature of co-accused---all the private witnesses had deposed against co-accused that they deposited their amount to co-accused and after receiving the cash amount, he was used to give the deposit slips to them---all the private witnesses, who had deposited their cash amount with Bank, deposed against co-accused that he was a real culprit, who had committed fraud and cheating with them---Sufficient material was available on record to connect the co-accused with the commission of offence, however, the conduct of the co-accused during confinement was satisfactory---Co-accused was the first offender and had no previous criminal history in his credit---Besides, the co-accused claimed himself to be only male member of the family and had also served for a period of six years two months and fourteen days imprisonments including remissions---High Court observed that since the co-accused had suffered adequate punishment hence, it was appropriate to give him an opportunity to improve himself as a law-abiding citizen---Sentences awarded to the co-accused were reduced from ten years to five years two months and fourteen days---appeal was dismissed with said modification.

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English