2007 PLP 467 (YLR)
MUMTAZ — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 467 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Rahmat Hussain Jafferi, J |
| Parties | MUMTAZ — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 467 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 467 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Rahmat Hussain Jafferi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 467 (YLR) (MUMTAZ — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Judgment & Decree
RAHMAT HUSSAIN JAFFERI, J.
On 9-1-1996 the trial Court framed the charge against the appellant for offence punishable under sections 467, 471, 472 and 420, P.P.C. on the allegation that on 9-8-1995 at 4-00 p.m. the police raided the shop of the appellant who was doing the business of making seals, secured some domicile certificates and seals from the shop. After trial, the learned Judge acquitted the appellant from the offences mentioned in the charge but by invoking the provisions of section 236, Cr.P.C. convicted the appellant for offence punishable under section 473, P.P.C., sentenced him to suffer R.I. for two years and fine of Rs.5,000 with benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. No doubt the prosecution had produced 29 seals before the .trial Court which were allegedly secured from the shop of the appellant. Admittedly the appellant is doing the business of making seals; therefore, in such circumstances, the prosecution was required to prove that the seals secured from the shop of the appellant were forged. That aspect of the case can only be proved by sending the seals secured from the shop of the appellant to the concerned department enquiring from them as to whether or not the seals belonged to the said departments are forged. There is no evidence available on the record to prove that the seals were sent to concerned department to establish the fact that the seals secured from the shop of the appellant belonged to them and forged. Without such evidence, the offence punishable under section 473, P.P.C. cannot be made out. Finding these defects in the prosecution evidence, the learned Asstt. A.-G. has not supported the impugned judgment. Consequently, the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant under the impugned judgment are set aside. The appellant is acquitted and set at liberty. He is present on bail, such bonds stand cancelled and surety discharged. The surety papers be returned to the surety after verification and as per rules. The appeal is allowed. H.B.T./M-160/K Appeal allowed.