ABDUL HAMEED vs State Ss — 2024 SCMR 1365 SUPREME-COURT

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

ABDUL HAMEED VS State Ss. 409 & 34---Prevention of Corruption act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)---Criminal breach of trust by public servant, common intention, criminal misconduct---Reappraisal of evidence---according to the prosecution version, an accused was granted post arrest bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/-; that the surety (acquitted by the appellate Court) furnished bail bond for the accused which was accompanied with two Defence Saving Certificates ('DSCs') amounting to Rs.50,000/- each; that subsequently the petitioner "KSa" along with the surety availed both DSCs from petitioner "aH" (junior clerk in the Court of additional District and Sessions Judge) on the pretext of getting photocopies of the same but did not return; and that the two DSCs were encashed by the surety---Held, that the beneficiary of encashing the two DSCs i.e. the surety had been acquitted of the charge by the appellate Court and his acquittal had not been challenged by the State---Record transpired that neither the bail bond of surety was forfeited by the Court nor fresh surety bond was availed by Court from the accused---as per record, after getting released on bail on the basis of surety bond submitted by the surety and despite encashing the two DSCs by the surety, the accused did not jump bail and after conclusion of trial proceedings, he was acquitted of the charge by the Court---Evidence available on record reveals that the accused had facilitated the surety for getting the two DSCs encashed but surprisingly accused was not arrayed as an accused/put on trial in present FIR---Record did not reveal any mens rea of the petitioner "aH" nor it revealed of any illegal consideration having been received by him from the petitioner "KSa"or from the acquitted surety---There was nothing on record to show that the petitioner "aH" as well as petitioner "KSa" had dishonestly misappropriated the two DSCs or had converted the same for their own use---Hence no case for criminal breach of trust punishable under sections 409/34, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption act, 1947 was made out against both the petitioners---Conviction and sentence of both the petitioners under sections 409/34, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption act, 1947, could not be sustained---Petitions were converted into appeals and allowed, and petitioners were acquitted of the charge.

ABDUL HAMEED vs State Ss — 2024 SCMR 1365 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 SCMR