The CHAIRMAN, NAB vs AHMED Ss — 2023 YLR 882 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

The CHAIRMAN, NAB VS AHMED Ss. 18(g) & 24--- Corruption and corrupt practices---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Respondents were charged to the effect that they being holders of public office in connivance with each other misused their authority and by means of corrupt, dishonest and illegal means caused loss of Rs. 3,80,22,566/- to the government exchequer as in execution of the schemes they violated the procedure laid down by rules and received commission/illegal gratification from the contractors---Record showed that the witness compiled report without visiting the site---Said witness in cross-examination stated that over payments were made by Chairman Town Committee and admitted that the schemes were approved by the Secretary Local Government, Chairman and members of District Council---Other witness in cross-examination admitted that compilation of measure book was the duty of Sub-Engineer---One of the respondents was posted as Assistant Engineer---Schemes were pertaining to year, 1999, whereas witnesses compiled their reports after lapse of two or three years of execution---Allegation of 35% commission by the accused persons from the contractors was without any substance to the extent of private respondents---None of the prosecution witnesses stated that the accused persons/ respondents had received commission from the contractors---Seven witnesses/ contractors had categorically stated that they had paid commission to another witness---Said witness who had admitted receiving of commission from contractors had not been made accused---Prosecution had failed to collect direct evidence in regard of taking commission by the accused/ respondents from any contractor---Prosecution had also failed to collect any evidence regarding Bank accounts of the accused/respondents to show that any commission was received by the accused/ respondent or deposited in their accounts---Mere fact that a person stand charged for trial in the Accountability Court did not give rise to a presumption of guilt in respect of offence---Initial burden lay on prosecution to establish necessary facts to show that the accused had misused his authority so as to gain any benefit for himself or for any other person---Circumstances established that prosecution was unable to show that the acquittal judgment of the Trial Court suffered from misreading or non-reading of evidence---Appeal against acquittal was dismissed, in circumstances.

The CHAIRMAN, NAB vs AHMED Ss — 2023 YLR 882 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR