IMRAN TAJ GICHKI vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 1075 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.

IMRAN TAJ GICHKI VS State Ss. 9(a)(v) & 10---Corruption and corrupt practices---Appreciation of evidence---Documentary evidence not establishing any nexus between the acquired property and the accused---Accused-respondents were charged with the allegation of accumulation of assets disproportionate to their known sources of income and caused loss to the government exchequer to the tune of Rs.184,609,136/- by means of corruption and corrupt practices---Trial Court convicted the accused "ITG" whereas accused "SI" was acquitted---Accusation of prosecution was that the NAB had conducted a raid on a house, to arrest the appellant, but at the time of raid, the appellant was not present in the house---While conducting the search of the house, Pakistani/foreign currency, jewellery, and documents were recovered, which were produced by prosecution witness---Documents produced by the prosecution witnesses depicted that the house belonged to "GJ", who was wife of "MA"---Payment for said house was made by "GJ" from her bank account---Prosecution had made acquitted accused-respondent in connected Criminal Ehtesab Acquittal Appeal and"GJ" as Benamidars in the said property on the strength of property documents, wherein, "GJ" nominated acquitted accused as her nominee in the property documents---Mere mentioning of the name of a nominee did not confer any title of ownership with the property, as such, the documents produced to such extent did not establish any nexus of the appellant with the said house---It was evident from the record that "MA" and "GJ" had the citizenship of the U.K. and the recovered Pakistani/foreign currency and gold ornaments from their house had no nexus with the appellant---Circumstances established that no infirmity and perversity in impugned judgment of acquittal had been found, thus appeal against acquittal was dismissed---Further prosecution failed to prove the charge against the co-convict, thus appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

IMRAN TAJ GICHKI vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 1075 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR