Jawed Aftab Tanweri vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 1321 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

Jawed Aftab Tanweri VS State Ss. 9 & 10---Corruption and corrupt practice---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Accused were charged for embezzlement of funds amounting to Rs. 190 million by committing procedural irregularities---In the present case, it was hard to believe that the Investigating Officer of the case while sitting in the office completed the investigation---Simple controversy was involved in this case, that the accused persons prepared fake work orders and misused their authority and embezzled the government funds on non-functional tube wells---Claim of the accused persons was that after repair the tube wells were functional---Thus, it was the duty of the Investigating Officer of the case to physically check/verify the tube wells in question whether the same were in working condition or not; whether meters were installed or not, and what was the reading of the meters; whether the electric meters were in working condition or not---Second duty of the Investigating Officer was to collect monthly electricity bills to see how many units were consumed---If in any month units were not consumed then he had to call a report from the concerned department---However, all of this was not done by the Investigating Officer---Second claim of the accused persons was that the work orders were issued toward maintenance of the tube wells which required maintenance i.e. mechanically and electrically---Investigating officer of the case had not checked which tube wells were maintained mechanically and which were maintained electrically, with respect to the maintenance material required viz. copper wire, grease oil, copper winding and other electrical material---Investigating Officer of the case was not even sure whether he had physically inspected tube wells in question or not---Dispute between the Provincial Government and WAPDA authorities was with regard to installation of the meter and not on the meter reading, the bills were issued and if it was the fault of WAPDA authorities as they had not issued the bills, then how the accused persons had committed the offence---In such a situation, it was the duty of the Engineer and Expert in the NAB as well as Investigating Officer of the case to leave their office, visit the site of 51 tube wells to verify that the meters were installed on those tube wells and whether they were in working condition or not, and how many units were consumed---Surprisingly the Investigating Officer of the case had not recorded the statement of Chowkidars and Operators who were posted on the tube wells in question to bring the real facts on record as to whether the Tube wells were in working condition or not---In such circumstances, no elements of the offence of corruption and corrupt practice in the transaction in question was found---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly.

Jawed Aftab Tanweri vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 1321 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ