Citation Name: 2025 YLR 342 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nazar Muhammad vs State S

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

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 342 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nazar Muhammad VS State S. 10---Corruption and corrupt practices---Appreciation of evidence---Accused were charged for causing loss to public exchequer of an amount of Rs. 312.5 million by revising the layout of the society, thus committing the offence of corruption and corrupt practices---Record showed that the accused/Administrator of society did not seek permission for the change of amenity plots to commercial plots and that such permission had already been applied for by Secretary of the Society which was approved and this was before the board of the Society was superseded and before the accused was appointed Administrator, and as such he had nothing to do with the initial process of revising the original lay out plan---Surprisingly, the person who seemed to have started the whole revision of the original lay out plan process i.e. the Secretary was not made an approver---Admittedly Secretary denied his signatures on these requests for change of lay out plan, however, the Investigating Officer did not arrange for his signatures to be examined by a hand writing export---Trial Court did not even seek to compare the two signatures of Secretary---So it appeared from the evidence that it was the witness who was the Secretary of the Society who initially sought to revise the lay out plan---According to a witness the letter dated 07.01.2013 was apparently signed by Secretary and the letter dated 04.01.2013 was signed by him and both said letters requested approval of lay out plan, and thus it was not appellant/Administrator who sought the approval---Secretary/witness did not even know who signed the revised layout plan---Signature of appellant/ Administrator was not on the revised lay out plan---Overall the evidence of Secretary of the Society was far from confidence inspiring and had grave doubts as to its reliability and truthfulness and certainly led to doubts about the role of appellant/ Administrator in seeking approval to change the layout plan---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 342 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nazar Muhammad vs State S — 2025 YLR 342 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR