1998 PLP 202 (MLD)
ABDUL JALIL KHAN — Petitioner Versus STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1998 PLP 202 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ABDUL JALIL KHAN — Petitioner Versus STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 202 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 202 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 202 (MLD) (ABDUL JALIL KHAN — Petitioner Versus STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Dost Muhammad Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.409/420/468/471
Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)
Accused had deposited substantial amount out of the alleged misappropriated amount in the Treasury before registration of the case
Evidence against accused consisted of official record which having been taken into possession by the raiding party, there was no possibility of the same being tampered with by him
Offences with which the accused was charged were not punishable with death or imprisonment for life
Judgment & Decree
Dost Muhammad Khan for Petitioner. Muhammad Khan Khakwani for the State. Date of hearing: 3rd July, 1996. Abdul Jalil accused-petitioner is facing prosecution in case F.I.R. No.5 dated 21-5-1996 of Police Station Anti-Corruption Establishment, Bannu under section 409/420/468/471, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. He, after registration of the case against him, applied for pre- arrest bail and allowed ad interim bail, however the same was not confirmed vide order dated 4-6-1996. Thereafter, he applied for post arrest bail which was also refused by the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Bannu. Hence the application in hand.
2. According to the F.I.R. the salaries drawn in the pay bills for the months of 2/1995 and 9/1995 amounting to Rs.3,915.06 in the name of Muhammad Irfanullah PTC Teacher, Government Primary School, Rahmzad Lapari were not disbursed and they were misappropriated by the petitioner, as an Accountant in the office of, the S.D.E.O. (Male), Bannu. When the same were claimed by Muhammad Irfanullah, P.T.C. Teacer, the petitioner instead of making payment to him arranged the drawal of double salaries in the different pay bills for the months of 10/1995 and 11/1995, in the name of Muhammad Irfanullah and sent to different pay centres for disbursement to dodge Muhammad Irfanullah for receiving his missing salaries and thus put to wrongful loss of the misappropriated amount to the Government exchequer.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case with their assistance.
4. The petitioner is charged under section 409/420/468/471, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. Before registration of the case the petitioner deposited Rs.1,957.53, in the treasury pertaining to the pay of Muhammad Irfanullah, P.T.C. Teacher for the month of October, 1995. The f evidence consists of official record which has been taken into possession by the raiding party. Thus there is no possibility of its tampering by the petitioner. The offences alleged against the petitioner are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, and the petitioner being a Government servant is allowed A bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Duty Magistrate. The above are the reasons for the short order of the even date. N.H.Q./2213/P Bail allowed.