2009 PLP 2076 (YLR)
THE STATE through Chairman — Petitioner Versus ABDUL GHAFFAR SHEIKH — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 2076 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Faisal Arab and Bin Yameen, JJ |
| Parties | THE STATE through Chairman — Petitioner Versus ABDUL GHAFFAR SHEIKH — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 2076 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 2076 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Faisal Arab and Bin Yameen, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 2076 (YLR) (THE STATE through Chairman — Petitioner Versus ABDUL GHAFFAR SHEIKH — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Aslam Butt, D. P. G. A. NAB for Appellant.
- Ghulam Rasool Mangi for Respondent
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 417 & 265-K
National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999), S.32
Accountability Court acquitted the respondent on the ground that beneficiary of the cheques himself subsequently deposited the amount in the account of State Life Insurance Corporation
Enquiry report did not show that respondent personally benefited himself in any manner
In view of the admitted position that beneficiary of the cheques had voluntarily returned the amount, said to have been fraudulently withdrawn after making additions in the cheques; and the enquiry report describing negligence on the part of the respondent as only a procedural lapse, there was no likelihood of any conviction on the basis of such material and acquittal order was rightly passed under S.265-K, Cr. P. C.
Judgment & Decree
The Accountability Court acquitted the respondent on the ground that the beneficiary of the, cheques, Muhammad Ayaz Shaikh, himself subsequently deposited the amount in the account of State Life Insurance Corporation. The allegation against the respondent is that one of the cheques was countersigned by the present respondent. Apart from these criminal proceedings, departmental enquiry was also initiated copy of which shows that at the time of countersigning, the respondent was found to be negligent but this negligence was described only a procedural lapse and he was only warned. In the inquiry it was not held that the respondent personally benefited himself in any manner. Keeping in view this admitted position that the beneficiary of the cheques, Muhammad Ayaz Shaikh, has voluntarily returned the amount of Rs.6,00,000 said to have been fraudulently withdrawn after making additions in the cheque and the enquiry report described negligence on the part of the respondent as only a procedural lapse, there was no likelihood of any conviction on the basis of such material and the acquittal order was rightly passed under section 265-K, Cr.P.C., hence this Cr. Acquittal Appeal is dismissed. H.B.T./S-66/K Appeal dismissed.