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

NAZIR AHMAD AFZAL vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJN 106 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2023 PCrLJN 106 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2023
Parties
NAZIR AHMAD AFZAL vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 5; S. 409

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

NAZIR AHMAD AFZAL VS State Ss. 409, 420, 468, 471 & 109---Prevention of Corruption act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)---Criminal breach of trust by public servant, cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery for purpose of cheating, using as genuine a forged document, abetment, criminal misconduct---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---accused was charged for misappropriating 16,451 filled bags of imported wheat in connivance with the food staff and caused loss of Rs. 1,41,47,860/- to the Government---Record showed that all the co-accused, government employees, were acquitted from the charge---acquittal of said co-accused was not challanged---accused was a contractor and was not a public servant, so he could not be prosecuted for having committed offence under P.P.C. as a public servant---Matter could not be treated as under S. 409, P.P.C.---Before a conviction under S. 409, P.P.C., could be recorded, the prosecution must prove two essential facts; the factum of entrustment and the factum of misappropriation of entrusted articles---No evidence was on record that any wheat was taken to the Flour Mills as owners of the said Mill were to have let off by the prosecution, hence there was no question of its misappropriation---Contractors were employed casually by different government departments---Contractors were not working exclusively for the complainant or for the government departments and they were not to be counted as employees of the complainant or for the government departments---Independent contractors were those who employ labour for and on behalf of themselves---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to bring home charge against the accused beyond any reasonable doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. [Paras. 10, 12 & 13 of the judgment]

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